[colug-432] NATs Are Good!

[Rick Troth]

Yes.
N-to-N mapping is really useful in IPv6.
As RFC 6296 calls it, a "Prefix Translation".
THIS is good stuff.

It's the N-to-1 mapping that I have come to loathe.
When first playing with IPv6, I looked for that capability.  I
controlled routing since it wasn't there.  Then it dawned on me that
it N-to-1 was not needed because the v6 space is so huge.  THEN it
dawned on me that a boatload of hassles surrounding N-to-1 merrily go
away in this new world!  Yay!





On Dec 11, 2012 3:10 PM, <jep200404 at columbus.rr.com> wrote:
>
> NATs are Good! Even for IPV6.
>
> http://www.h-online.com/open/features/Kernel-Log-Coming-in-3-7-Part-2-Networking-1752099.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> colug-432 mailing list
> colug-432 at colug.net
> http://lists.colug.net/mailman/listinfo/colug-432