[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: why market picked up NATs



On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Andrew White wrote:

> I think it's a little more complex.
> 
> Let's leave aside the daisy-chained NATs for a moment (which is a nightmare
> waiting to happen) and look at the home deployment scenario.
> 
> Using 6to4, it is reasonably easy to build an all-in-one IPv6 home gateway
> right now.  Currently, it's advantageous if the gateway does both IPv4 and
> IPv6, since DNS support virtually requires v4.  At this point, you have
> end-to-end connectivity from any host (something you don't get with NAT),
> less whatever your firewall chooses to filter out.
> 
> The real issue is application support.  In the consumer market, OS X has
> IPv6, but it's hidden from most users.  Win XP also has IPv6, but it
> requires a bunch of chicanery to get it working.  The real killer is that

Actually, the Windows XP implementation is pretty much plug and play.  
Run 'ipv6 install' and it's ready to do 6to4 automatically.  If it's
already attached to a network that has an IPv6 router it'll favor the
advertised local router over the tunnel and obtain it's prefix from the
local router.  One of the 6to4 gateway addresses it automatically uses is
the RFC 3068 anycast 6to4 relay.


--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------