I know it's a joke, but the idea that NAT has any business existing makes me angry. It's a hack that causes real headaches for network admins and protocol design. The effects are mostly hidden from end users because those two groups have twisted things in knots to make sure end users don't notice too much. The Internet is more centralized and controlled because of it.

No, it is not a security feature. That's a laughable claim that shows you shouldn't be allowed near a firewall.

Fortunately, Google reports that IPv6 adoption is close to cracking 50%.

[–] truthfultemporarily@feddit.org 96 points 3 days ago (7 children)

I think NAT is one reason why the internet is so centralized. If everyone had a static IP you could do all sorts of decentralized cool stuff.

[–] Creat@discuss.tchncs.de 38 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Everyone having a static IP is a privacy nightmare.

There's a reason the recommendation in the standard for ipv6 had to be amended (it whatever the mechanic was) so that generated local suffixes aren't static. Before that, we were essentially globally identifiable because just the second half of your v6 address was static.

[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 24 points 3 days ago

IPv4 centralization creates far more privacy issues than everyone having a static IP. The solutions are still things like VPNs and onion routing.

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (26 replies)