131–140 of 158 posts
I'm interested in any new successful startups going full IPV6 from the beginning. Once we cross that bridge, where your internal IPV4 knowledge is equivalent to token ring knowledge, there's nothing else to watch.
Github still refuses to switch on support for ipv6 traffic for some reason, so you can't interact with github then
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see this often that people refer to countries as actors. Are you implying that the government of these countries bought those resources and they're now owned by the government? Or are you saying that citizens/corporations of those countries are buying? I find it weird, I wouldn't use the phrase "The United States is buying XYZ" unless it was the current government doing so?
China does not have a meaningful distinction between private industry and the state. She also maintains a level of surveillance and control, particularly in the IT world, that makes this hard with some level of government sanction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone with a background in electronics who doesn't manage any internet-connected equipment but has multiple embedded devices connected to a WAN, I'm glad that IPv4 still seems to have a bit of life left in it. When IPv6 was developed, over 30 years ago, connecting everything to the internet seemed like a great idea. I know that IPv6 can be made secure, but I don't have the background or research time to learn ho…
NAT is not a security measure at all. It just obscures what's behind a firewall, but that is leaky and not reliable from a security perspective. It might make you feel better, but that is not security.
If I have an IPv6 router, I can miss-configure it in a way where all of my internal communications between IoT devices work as expected, but they also have discoverable addresses on the internet. This would give the firewall something to do, but I'd rather there be no route in the first place.
Also, if I trusted myself to properly configure my router for IPv6, I would put all of my IoT equipment on ULAs, which much like an IPv4 NAT would leave me with nothing to configure in the firewall.
If I were to take your claims at face value, using GUAs with packet filtering is far more reliable and secure than ULAs, and that seems preposterous.
A properly configured firewall for sure adds security, but isolation always wins out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I know that IPv6 can be made secure, but I don't have the background or research time to learn how to do so, and the NAT-by-default of IPv4 effectively means that I get the benefit of a default-deny security strategy that makes it impossible to accidentally directly connect anything to the internet. To get the "unsolicted traffic is rejected or dropped" behavior of the typical IPv4 NAT, forward inbound traffic that…
Yeah, that's the kind of stuff that I know how it works from a network protocol standpoint, but have no clue how to configure on any given system, let alone verify I configured it correctly. I installed DD-WRT on my router, hoping it would be easier to set up. The user interface was much easier to navigate, but the labels of the settings were so sparse that I couldn't tell what anything was referring to, even knowing…
Since you're in the mood for experimentation, you might try OpenWRT. They even have a somewhat-fancy-shmancy configuration GUI called LuCI.
I'm thinking about going full on IPv6 now with NAT64, but that a stretch already, because it needs upgrading a gear.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Expect CG-NAT boxes are expensive, and introduce another point of failure into the network. Most mobile carriers are running IPv6 first networks these days anyway. Like you said, CG-NAT does have the benefit of making v4 address reputation less reliable, which means it's not as big a deal for the transition to v6.
>CG-NAT does have the benefit of making v4 address reputation less reliable heh, less reliable is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. You mean "complete and total trash". We need to get to the point where Cloudflare/AWS/some other big sites just block CG-NAT nodes for a day going this IP address is a risk. Instead if you're a website, instead of doing an easy block by IP, you're left filtering out AI crawlers, spamme…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>CG-NAT does have the benefit of making v4 address reputation less reliable heh, less reliable is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. You mean "complete and total trash". We need to get to the point where Cloudflare/AWS/some other big sites just block CG-NAT nodes for a day going this IP address is a risk. Instead if you're a website, instead of doing an easy block by IP, you're left filtering out AI crawlers, spamme…
[flagged]