Subject: Re: questions for article about IPv6

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 10:46:50 -0400

A while back (July 5), I wrote:

> if anyone wants, I can summarize direct responses.

I've received a number of requests for the summary, so here it is:

I received one response to the original request, basically saying that NAT breaks end-to-endness and therefore breaks IPsec, but NATs can be useful for protecting against DoS.

Using other sources, the article has been turned in and should be in the August issue of Information Security Magazine.

-pl

-- 
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Loshin             http://www.loshin.com               |
| [email-masked]         +1 781/646-6318                     |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 11:16:15 -0400

> > NATs can be useful for protecting against DoS.
> 
> an oft repeated fantasy.  complete and utter bs, of course.

Whatever.

I was asked to summarize responses; that was _the_ response I got, so I 
summarized it.

That several people requested the summary indicates the original topic 
(security implications of IPv6--not NATs) might be worth discussing on the 
list.

-pl

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2001 07:58:47 -0700

randy, channeling keith