11–20 of 130 posts
I build my own NAT instances from Debian Trixie with Packer on AWS. AWS built-in NAT Gateways use an absurdly outdated and end-of-life version of Amazon Linux and are ridiculously expensive (especially traffic). The bash configuration is literally a few lines: cat /dev/null net.ipv4.ip_forward=1 EOF sudo sysctl --system sudo iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ens5 -j MASQUERADE sudo iptables -F FORWARD sudo iptables -…
Please can we do away with NAT forever. Why are we still encouraging this? It’s caused the world to do horrible kludges and continues to do so.
1.) IPv4 is still heavily favored over IPv6. 2.) Market segmentation: keeps home users from easily hosting their own services without spending $$$ on an upgraded plan. 3.) Adding on to #2, I've seen claims of providers putting IPv6 behind NAT, so don't think full IPv6 acceptance will solve this problem.
I get annoyed even when what's offered is a single /64 prefix (rather than something like a /56 or even /60), but putting IPv6 behind NAT is just ridiculous.
It is a damn service, which is defined as "you pay someone to do it".
It's honestly ridiculous that people now see that self hosting is stupidly cheaper and still 99.9% reliable. No your service does not need the extra .099% availability for 100x the price... Make your own VPN while you are at it, wireguard is basically the same config.
For personal a cheap vps will end up costing around the same as something you can do on your own, without the risk of messing up your machine/network from a vulnerable endpont
I can't believe people are paying these crazy amounts for what is basically a fleet of firewalls. What is the difficulty in running VMs with nftables rules?
I don't know what is the point of this kind of article. People care the cost and can do it already do it. It is a damn service, which is defined as "you pay someone to do it".
(your second sentence is a bit confusing)
I can't believe people are paying these crazy amounts for what is basically a fleet of firewalls. What is the difficulty in running VMs with nftables rules?
2) Companies will happily pay thousands in recurring fees for the built-in NAT gateway, but if an engineer asks for even half that as a one-off sum to motivate them to learn Linux networking/firewalling, they'd get a hard no, so why should they bother?
Why state this as absolute fact? Seems a bit lacking in epistemic humility.
Please can we do away with NAT forever. Why are we still encouraging this? It’s caused the world to do horrible kludges and continues to do so.