News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms. Parent comment

Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms by norenh on Friday December 22, 2023 @11:47AM (#38735935)
> NAT was a necessity when it was being introduced, so I don't understand the complaints. Sure it's annoying, but what was the alternative?

IPv6

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms by fiddlerwoaroof on Friday December 22, 2023 @12:30PM (#38736439)
IPv6 would have been great if it was just bigger addresses but the actual system we got suffers heavily from the second-system effect.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms by crazygringo on Friday December 22, 2023 @12:04PM (#38736145)
Nope. IPv6 still isn't supported everywhere.

When you're running out of addresses, you need a workable solution at the moment.

Not something that requires all networking equipment worldwide to be replaced with a new standard, with is a practical impossibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms by BenjiWiebe on Friday December 22, 2023 @10:21PM (#38741336)
It doesn't have to be replaced all at once. Most of it already has been replaced.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Most 16-year-olds don't have servers in their rooms by crazygringo on Saturday December 23, 2023 @10:13AM (#38744765)
But it has to be entirely replaced in order to turn off the last NAT, essentially.

Being half-replaced or even mostly-replaced gets you nowhere in terms of NAT removal.

[ Parent | on HN ]