On 17/02/2007, at 5:35 PM, Stuart MacIntosh wrote:
I agree, the security benefits are welcome. In my IPv6 network mr. router applies security in much the same way as a NAT-IPv4 router does.
Which ruins any end-to-end benefits that IPv6 was going to give over IPv4, right? (ie. SIP, etc. won't work, unless the router knows about it) So, why are we caring about IPv6 as a means to preserve end-to-end IP, if moving to IPv6 means we don't really get it either? Proxies etc. can be deployed, and be working for everyone (save a few corner cases, perhaps), right now. They don't require any global switchover/upgrade/etc. and on top of that, they can be used as extra revenue streams/products/etc. Note that I /don't/ think that IPv6 deployment is a good thing - infact I've been working on plans to v6-ify my various servers - I just feel that the current "IPv4 space running out will mean that IPv6 /needs/ to be deployed" thoughts are not necessarily true. -- Nathan Ward