[ale] IPv4 devices on IPv6 network

[Brian Stanaland]

What really sucks is that ipv6 is designed to eliminate the need for NAT.
Well, maybe not designed but it sure does eliminate the need to NAT due to
limited IP address availability. Every device can have a publicly routable
IP address. And that scares the heeby jeebies out of ISPs.

--Brian

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Michael Campbell <michael.campbell at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Alex Carver <agcarver+ale at acarver.net>wrote:
>
>> On 6/30/2012 09:44, Michael Campbell wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Alex Carver <agcarver+ale at acarver.net
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi everyone,
>> >>
>> >> Got a "plan ahead" question for you.  I've got a handful of
>> >> firmware-based devices that are IPv4-only never to be made IPv6 capable
>> >> (PLCs, some print servers, data loggers, etc.)
>> >>
>> >
>> > This may not affect you, and just an FYI, but...you mention AT&T later,
>> so
>> > be aware that at least with U-Verse, they have said that LANs (on
>> uVerse)
>> > can no longer use the 10.0.0.0/8 addresses.  There is rumor that this
>> is
>> > due to AT&T moving to a corporate wide NAT where their whole network is
>> > going to be behind a NAT, and that your AT&T modem/router is going to be
>> > given a 10.*.*.* address in that space.   This is supposed to happen
>> 6-Jul.
>>
>> I have not heard any formal mention from AT&T.  My 10.0.0.0/8 is with my
>> own router whose external IP is a static, public IP from AT&T (one of
>> five).  I am not using 10.0.0.0/8 off of their own U-verse interface
>> box, only mine (the default internal IP space of the U-verse box is
>> 192.168.0.0/16 but I think it is cut down to 192.168.0.0/24).  Static IP
>> is no rumor, I already have it and it really is $15/month (as quoted on
>> my bill sitting on my desk right now).
>>
>
> They only sent notices to people using 10.* as their internal LAN space
> that they could see that that's what you're doing.  A buddy of mine got
> this notice.
>
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27252106-counting-down-to-July-6th-and-worried
>
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27139475-I-need-to-change-my-network-addresses-for-Uverse-expansion-
>
> The worry for many, is that my uverse router is visible to the external
> internet right now.   As of 7-Jul, it may not be if they put all the uverse
> customer routers behind some mega-NAT and start giving them 10.* addresses,
> and they're damn sure not going to port forward from that to my uverse box.
>  For me, running something that I need to get to from outside, this is a
> bit of a disaster.  Or, I can pay $15/mo more for the exact same service
> and capabilities I have now.  Yay.
>
> The $15 rumor is not for a static IP, but rather for *ANY* IP that can be
> seen from the internet. I don't think they are even saying it's static
> (which doesn't bother me since I use a dynamic dns service for that
> anyway). (http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r27172336-)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
> http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo
>
>


-- 
The more laws and order are made prominent,
The more thieves and robbers there will be.*Lao-tzu*, *The Way of Lao-tzu*
*Chinese philosopher (604 BC - 531 BC)*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.ale.org/pipermail/ale/attachments/20120701/7788de93/attachment.html