North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Important IPv6 Policy Issue -- Your Input Requested

  • From: Valdis.Kletnieks
  • Date: Tue Nov 09 16:18:56 2004 
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 03:14:51 EST, Jerry Eyers said:

> "Get a firewall" is not a valid response when you have lusers
> to drop the latest netgear whatever onto their PC and dial
> to some provider somewhere.  Your firewall is useless to
> protect that segment.  In many cases NAT is the ONLY
> protection you end up with in this scenario, a scenario that
> is far to common in the corporate world.

And NAT does what, exactly, to defend you against a PC that has
one interface on the NAT'ed network and one interface "elsewhere/elsewhen"
(be it a netgear, or somebody at the far end of a VPN, or a laptop
that was connected externally, and now is on the corporate LAN)?

There's a *reason* why Bill Cheswick said "A crunchy shell around
a soft, chewy inside"......

Attachment: pgp00012.pgp
Description: PGP signature