Andrew Suffield wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 01:04:07PM +1000, Paul Gear wrote:
>> Andrew Suffield wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> But beware -- ipt6tables does not support any form of NAT.
>>> So if you want to deploy ipv6 in production alongside an existing ipv4
>>> network (like, say, the internet), then you're screwed.
>> No, you're simply obliged to route IPv6, even if your current IPv4 setup
>> uses NAT.  My understanding is that the formulators of IPv6 view NAT as
>> a hack that works around the limitations in IPv4 that they removed in
>> IPv6.  To a certain extent i understand their philosophy, although i'm
>> not convinced NAT is as evil as they say it is...
> 
> I think you missed the point - if the only way to handle a combined
> ipv4/ipv6 setup is to use ip6tables for everything, then you cannot
> use NAT for your *ipv4* network.

Andrew,

I'm currently running a combined IPv4/IPv6 router that is using NAT for
IPv4 and straight routing for IPv6. I'm using Shorewall (iptables) for
the IPv4 firewall and I'm using ip6tables for the IPv6 firewall (until I
get Shorewall6 running)

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep    \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline,     \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key   \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to