From: CCIEin2006 (ciscocciein2006@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Dec 14 2005 - 13:31:01 GMT-3
Not exactly,
The only reason he may believe that IPv6 is more secure is because IPSEC
functionality is built into the protocol (you don't necessarily have
to enable it though) whereas in IPv4 IPSEC is an add on feature. They pretty
much do the same thing though.
One thing I don't understand regarding IPv6 is they say it is better than
IPv4 because it gives true "end-to-end communication" and no longer requires
NAT on the internet. But if thats true don't you lose the security benefits
that NAT gives by hiding the inside addresses?!?
Maybe the experts like Scott or the Brians can comment?
On 12/14/05, Bobby Acker <aggiebob98@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> A coworker made a claim yesterday that IPv6 was more secure than IPv4. I
> can think of a few instances were this might be the case. Does anyone have
> opinions on this and why this would or would not be true?
>
> Bobby
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 09 2006 - 07:07:51 GMT-3