The world in which IPv6 was a good design (2017)

Re:The world in which IPv6 was a good design (2017) by icedchai on Tuesday December 29, 2020 @10:36AM (#25570717)

At one point I had an entire /24 routed over a 28.8K connection. I eventually upgraded to an ISDN line. Fun times.

It sounds like what you really want is a firewall, not NAT. Having a globally unique prefix (either IPv6 or v4) does not mean your network is completely accessible externally. There are no dependencies. It actually makes things simpler if you ever want to connect two internal networks.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The world in which IPv6 was a good design (2017) by magicalhippo on Tuesday December 29, 2020 @01:53PM (#25573336)

Of course I want a firewall. We all do. That much was obvious even when I was on dial-up, installing Shorewall or whatever it was back in 2000.

My point is that if you have a firewall you're in the exact same position as if you have a firewall+NAT in that you need to be able to punch holes in it.

IPv6 on its own does nothing to help with this.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The world in which IPv6 was a good design (2017) by stkdump on Tuesday December 29, 2020 @03:02PM (#25574127)

NAT make hoke punching more complicated (or depending on exact type of NAT impossible)

[ Parent | on HN ]