[ipv6-wg] Simulation of the future IPv4 world at RIPE meetings?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Simulation of the future IPv4 world at RIPE meetings?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Agenda for IPv6 wg RIPE (v1)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Kostas Zorbadelos
kzorba at otenet.gr
Fri Sep 25 09:06:46 CEST 2009
On Thursday 24 September 2009 17:44:38 Marco Hogewoning wrote: > On 24 sep 2009, at 16:30, Kostas Zorbadelos wrote: > > If a /24 is used for NAT, considering the size of RIPE meetings, I > > guess > > nobody will notice anything inconvenient. > > It's a 1 in 3 mapping if you count heads, I guess devices is 1 on 5 :) > If you think this won't raise any issues I guess the world in general > doesn't have a problem, we can simply extend the IPv4 space by a > multiple of 5 :P > I didn't say there are no issues, I said the people will not feel inconvenient. > Even if open ports wouldn't be an issue, think of: > > - inbound connections (people using VOIP) There are ugly ways to address this (eg ALG). > - VPN to connect back home (meeting is still providing fixed IP for > that purpose) I have used openVPN in a NAT environment without problems. > - CPU load > - traceability (Pentagon got hacked by somebody at RIPE-XX) > :-D Don't get me wrong, I am a proponent of IPv6 and I hate NAT. But unfortunately all those ugly solutions keep IPv4 running, who knows for how long more. Regards, Kostas > Groet, > > MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Simulation of the future IPv4 world at RIPE meetings?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Agenda for IPv6 wg RIPE (v1)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]