this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2024
667 points (98.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

31183 readers
113 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] eclipse 10 points 4 days ago (34 children)

It also means you no longer need the kludge that is NAT. Full E2E connectivity is really nice -- though I've found some network admins dislike this idea because they're so used to thinking about it differently or (mistakenly) think it adds to their security.

[–] ikidd 14 points 4 days ago (14 children)

NAT still has its place in obfuscating the internal network. Also, it's easier to think about firewall/routing when you segregate a network behind a router on its own subnet, IMO.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Obfuscation is not security, and not having IPv6 causes other issues. Including some security/privacy ones.

There is no problem having a border firewall in IPv6. NAT does not help that situation at all.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You don't need to give up IPV6 to have NAT though.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

But why bother? "Let's make my network slower and more complicated so it works like a hack on the old thing".

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (30 replies)