Subject: Re: IPv6 Comment
To: Mike Cheponis <mac@Wireless.Com>
From: Jason R Thorpe <>
List: current-users
Date: 09/01/2000 07:02:44
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 09:25:40AM +0200, S.P.Zeidler wrote:

 > NAT has slowed down the need for addresses, but if you connect more

NAT also has the problem of being fundamentally incompatible with
end-to-end security.  It is directly at odds with "prevent the packet
from being modified or viewed by third parties", since it modifies the
packet headers, and examines the contents for the purposes of proxying
e.g. FTP connections.

 > Besides, IPv6 also incorporates lots of neat stuff as mandatory that's
 > a rare option in IPv4, and large installation admins will love it for that
 > as well.

Indeed!  Things like stateless autoconfiguration and link-local
addresses make configuring large installations of workstations
VERY easy.

 > regards,
 > 	spz (currently proud user of 2001:680:1::/64)

        -- Jason R. Thorpe <>
           ...proud user of 3ffe:0507:0183::/48