> From: discuss-boun...@lopsa.org [mailto:discuss-boun...@lopsa.org] On > Behalf Of Yves Dorfsman > > NAT is used to let more devices use the internet, than the number of > public ip > addresses that available to the organisation. > > But I know a few companies that ended up with a class B network, only > have a > few thousand internal nodes (< 20 K), but still use NAT for "security > reasons", to hide their internal infrastructure. I'm not really sure it > adds > any level of security, but have found that this idea (myth?) is > commonly accepted. > > Will people still use NAT with IPv6? Anybody worked for a medium size > organisation with several thousand nodes and IPv6? What did you/they > do?
I see no reason to use NAT with IPv6. Formerly, it provided some level of security, because it's implicitly blocking inbound traffic except as established/related, but it would be smarter, if you want that, just to create a rule to block inbound traffic. However, a lot of companies will probably continue with their "Block all access to the Internet, and make all our internal users go through a proxy" policies. Which I hate. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lopsa.org http://lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/discuss This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
