17 Jul
2012
17 Jul
'12
8:03 a.m.
I have almost one hundred FWs. Some physical. Some virtual. Various vendors. Your point is spot on. -Hammer- "I was a normal American nerd" -Jack Herer On 7/16/2012 8:55 PM, Lee wrote:
On 7/16/12, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
Why would you want NAT66? ICK!!! One of the best benefits of IPv6 is being able to eliminate NAT. NAT was a necessary evil for IPv4 address conservation. It has no good use in IPv6. NAT is good for getting the return traffic to the right firewall. How else do you deal with multiple firewalls & asymmetric routing?
Yes, it's possible to get traffic back to the right place without NAT. But is it as easy as just NATing the outbound traffic at the firewall?
Lee