News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by pdonis on Monday June 26, 2017 @12:56PM (#14638283)
> MIT is just moving to IPv6.

The "just" is incorrect. There are four bullets on the slide: DHCP, IPV6, private IPV4/NAT, and firewall. From the diagram it looks to me like even if you move to IPV6 (which, as others have noted, MIT has not yet rolled out, so at this point you can't), you will still be behind the firewall, so setting up a service visible to the Internet will still be more difficult than it used to be.

Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by rspeer on Monday June 26, 2017 @01:14PM (#14638461)
The post isn't objecting to the firewall, though.

I totally understand the need for a campus-wide firewall. The MIT network is a juicy target for botnets, and individual students are not good enough at running security on their own computers. The old approach to IP assignment was that you needed to get your IP approved and made routable by IS&T anyway, and if they detected botnet activity on your computer, they'd manually intervene and make it unroutable again. That sounds like a lot of work.

If computers end up with firewalled but publicly routable IPv6 addresses, that sounds perfect.

Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by imjustapie on Monday June 26, 2017 @01:27PM (#14638616)
Even in the old approach, you get publicly routable addresses over DHCP. The approval was for static addresses only, and was very fast, because you're literally on the same network as the DHCP addresses.

If they detect bad activity, they blacklist your MAC address so you can't connect. This is no different under the new scheme, and has nothing to do with NAT.

Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by omegaworks on Monday June 26, 2017 @02:19PM (#14639021)
Independent living communities controlled this process using an automated registration system. In my living group I was elected to the position democratically, attended a training seminar, and passed down the knowledge to my successor. I hope they continue to give the students the same autonomy.

But I have my doubts. http://pilot2021.com/index.html

Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by Animats on Monday June 26, 2017 @01:01PM (#14638333)
MIT doesn't have IPv6 everywhere yet? That's lame.
Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by ocschwar on Monday June 26, 2017 @01:19PM (#14638534)
MIT just sold off half of its class A subnet.

MIT was always going to be the last place on earth to go total IPv6

Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by jandrese on Monday June 26, 2017 @02:02PM (#14638894)
They'll get to IPv6 faster than the DOD, I guarantee it.
Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by compuguy on Monday June 26, 2017 @03:26PM (#14639541)
Even Verizon wireline hasn't deployed IPv6....
Re:By installing NAT, MIT stifles innovation by pmarreck on Monday June 26, 2017 @07:58PM (#14641454)
Are you saying that owning an entire class A of IPv4 addresses was a disincentive to go IPv6? ;)