[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
NAT66 was Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space
- Subject: NAT66 was Re: using "reserved" IPv6 space
- From: ler762 at gmail.com (Lee)
- Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:55:40 -0400
On 7/16/12, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
> Why would you want NAT66? ICK!!! One of the best benefits of IPv6 is being
> able to eliminate NAT. NAT was a necessary evil for IPv4 address
> conservation. It has no good use in IPv6.
NAT is good for getting the return traffic to the right firewall. How
else do you deal with multiple firewalls & asymmetric routing?
Yes, it's possible to get traffic back to the right place without NAT.
But is it as easy as just NATing the outbound traffic at the
firewall?
Lee