Re: Does IPv6 preclude use of a NAT gateway?
On 12/07/11 13:36, William Hopkins wrote:
> On 07/12/11 at 12:33pm, Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 12/07/11 09:42, William Hopkins wrote:
>>> On 07/10/11 at 07:20am, Randy Kramer wrote:
>>>> On Saturday 09 July 2011 10:22:01 pm William Hopkins wrote:
>>>>> On 07/09/11 at 05:14pm, Randy Kramer wrote:
>>
>> <snipped>
>
> I understand your concern, but I legitimately believe they will be
> unable to limit you to a single device when IPv6 is rolled out. As it
> is, most ISPs in the US have changed their policy not to penalize
> clients with home networks. Even the great offender, Comcast (I fear
> no corporate reprisal) has adopted this policy.
If you can imagine the internet in USA if Ma Bell hadn't been broken up,
you'd have a better idea of the Australian situation.
>
> Of course no-one is IPv6 ready, so it will be some time before this
> becomes anything other than a theoretical discussion.
>
Agreed - I suspect NAT will delay things for a long, long, time.
The overseas experience *is* different.
Our (two) major ISPs have no plans to implement IPV6. And then there's
the NBN... (which also has no plans in the agreed infrastructure to
implement IPV6).
Smaller ISPs (iiNet, Internode, TPG and Adam Internet) have been running
dual stacks for some time - so I don't fear for choices. (but then I
live in the Nation's capital, so broadband is a myth)
On a different thread - I probably should have pointed out that the
IPSec is mandatory with IPV6, which should make IPV6 more secure that IPV4.
Cheers
--
What did moths bump into before the electric light bulb was invented?
Boy, the lightbulb really screwed the moth up didn't it? Are there moths
on their way to the sun now going, "It's gonna be worth it!"
~ Bill Hicks
Reply to: