Pwnat – Autonomous Nat Traversal (2010)

Re:Pwnat – Autonomous Nat Traversal (2010) by adev_ on Tuesday September 17, 2019 @01:58PM (#20998151)

> without a gigantic investment in hardware to support an over-engineered replacement protocol.

Bullshit.

Almost every piece of hardware sold since 15 years is compatible IPv6. There is no need of any "expensive hardware".

The main reason that IPV6 never lift off is the lack of interest, lazyness and no will for configuration.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pwnat – Autonomous Nat Traversal (2010) by AnIdiotOnTheNet on Tuesday September 17, 2019 @02:40PM (#20998671)

NAT is older than 15 years though. And

> lack of interest, lazyness and no will for configuration

Is a symptom of v6 being over-engineered.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pwnat – Autonomous Nat Traversal (2010) by api on Tuesday September 17, 2019 @05:24PM (#21000231)

IPv6 is really just IPv4 with more address space. There are a bunch of extensions that nobody uses, sure, but nobody uses them and they can be safely ignored in most cases.

The only other significant change from V4 to V6 is the use of multicast instead of dumb broadcast for V6's equivalent of ARP on LANs. That's an improvement as it allows smart switches to more easily scale address lookup.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pwnat – Autonomous Nat Traversal (2010) by ronsor on Tuesday September 17, 2019 @03:30PM (#20999150)

NAT is more over-engineered than IPv6. IPv6 is literally the same as IPv4 in most aspects. People are just lazy because NAT makes things "work" (if you can call it that).

[ Parent | on HN ]