Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (1826 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] Moving to IPv6
  • From: Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:02:44 -0400
  • Message-id: <1284055364.3942.61.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 15:36 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
On Thu, 2010-09-09 at 14:57 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
Try setting up for voice over IP or certain gaming to more than
one computer.
No problem - I have a number of Linksys/Cisco SPA phones hooked up
from peoples home offices to our central telephone server. The
is usually sat behind a NAT'ing router. This has been working
well for at least two years now. Of course, I run a stun daemon.
Emphasis: "Of course, I run a stun daemon."
Therefore: problem eliminated.
Try using ssh to multiple computers, without changing
port numbers.
I do that every day from my workstation. (which is behind a NAT
The issue is the reverse.
Yeah, I thought that mnight be it - well, to me, it also seems a
contrived. When I need external ssh access to something on my NAT'ed
network, I ssh to the NAT'ing gateway, and from there to whatever I
The basis of your argument is that NAT is *simple*.
I *do* think NAT is simple, but that's not the basis of my argument.
I'm merely arguing against the suggestion that "NAT is broken in a
number of ways"

It is exactly "broken in a number of ways".

when the problems mentioned turn out to be either
contrived or non-problems.

So everything that doesn't specifically apply to your use-case is

Do you enjoy double-SSH-ing? Why bother? Wouldn't it be nice not to
have to futz with port-forwards?

I own a 1919 Model-T Ford. I can crank-start it or use the electric
starter. I always use the electric starter. Why? Its easier, and
safer [just like IPv6].

To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread