[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: valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu (valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu)
- Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 01:20:35 -0400
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:31:42 -0700." <[email protected]>
- References: <CAD8GWsswFwnPKTfxt=squUmZofs3_-yriHY8o4Gt3W9+x6fVUQ@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAPiURgV+E-FLg_dkKq97P1OkhBWuZGiRVQd1GvY-Uh=09omREQ@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]>
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012 21:31:42 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
> Think HA pairs in Pittsburgh, Dallas, and San Jose.
>
> Now imagine each has different upstream connectivity and the backbone
> network connecting all the corporate sites lives inside those firewalls.
>
> The real solution to this is to move the backbone outside of the firewalls
> and connect the internal networks via VPNS that ride the external backbone
> and can be routed over the internet safely when a backbone link fails.
Wouldn't this be even easier if you gave each machine involved multiple
addresses, one ULA and one external? This isn't IPv4 anymore, you can
stick multiple addresses on an interface. :)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 865 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20120717/8d828892/attachment.bin>