On 04/15/2015 10:15 AM, Ruel, Ryan wrote:
Mukesh,
I believe the idea is that for IPv6, NAT will not be needed (that's the
beauty of having so much address space!).
Technically, sure, you could NAT IPv6. But why?
/Ryan
Ryan,
Perhaps the best reason to address this is that the exact same thing
would have been said about IPv4 back in the day, so addressing this
issue now might make sense as a way of future-proofing things.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users@lists.strongswan.org
https://lists.strongswan.org/mailman/listinfo/users
