Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

[Marc van Selm <marc.van.selm@localhost]

On Tuesday 28 August 2007 01:02, Dean Anderson wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > Basically, because some people are too dense to use IPsec or SSL for
> > traffic they don't want observed, you want to greatly complicate the
> > average home network's design?  That they should be more scared of, say,
> > their spouse sniffing their credit card numbers at home than the NSA and
> > FBI tapping their email and web browsing at the CO?
>
> It has nothing to do with IPsec or SSL.  Your view of what people do at
> home is kind of narrow.  Some people run businesses out of their house,
> and some have quite complicated home networks, with wifi for guests and
> and other parts they don't want guests to get into.

I agree, not all home users have a small flat LAN. I'm personally running a 
VPN between 2 locations (privately) that are 85km seperated. Concequently I 
have 3 subnets (location A, WAN and location B). Besides that I have a VPN 
access when I'm on the road into those as well (currently IPv4 but as soon as 
I have the time v6). So I guess I'm actually using 4 subnets. I'm currently 
running my WLAN closed and not open to my guests but if I would open it 
(which I consider when I have some time to set up a captive portal log-in 
facility). Then I'd have 6 subnets (the 4 already mentioned + guest WLAN at 
both locations). I know I'm not the average user and probably more a geek 
but... And like Dean suggests already, I use crypto for completely different 
purposes, I don't need to subnet for that.

Regards, Marc
-- 

                -- This mail is personal --
All statements in this mail are made from my own personal
perspective and do not necessarily reflect my employer's
opinions or policies.