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

Re: mh (RE: OMB: IPv6 by June 2008)

  • From: Crist Clark
  • Date: Thu Jul 07 15:56:24 2005 
Andre Oppermann wrote:

Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
 >


I'd have to counter with "the assumption that NATs are going
away with v6 is a rather risky assumption." Or perhaps I
misunderstood your point...

There is one thing often overlooked with regard to NAT.  That is,
it has prevented many network based worms for millions of home
users behind NAT devices.  Unfortunatly this fact is overlooked
all the time.  NAT has its downsides but also upsides sometimes.

And the counter point to that argument is that the sparse population
of IPv6 space will make systematic scanning by worms an ineffective
means of propagation.
--
Crist J. Clark                               [email protected]
Globalstar Communications                                (408) 933-4387