Today in our newest take on “older technology is better”: why NAT rules!

  • mholiv@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think it’s worth taking the time to learn IPv6 property. If you have a good understanding of IPv4 it shouldn’t take you more than an afternoon.

    Eliminating NAT and just using firewall rules (ie what NAT does behind your back) is incredibly freeing.

    I don’t get people complaining about typing out IPs. I like to give all of my clients full FQDNs but you don’t have to. Just using mDNS would be enough to avoid typing a bunch of numbers.

    • FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Maybe I have Stockholm Syndrome, but I like NAT. It’s like, due to the flaws of IPv4 we basically accidentally get subnets segmented off, no listening ports, have to explicitly configure port forwarding to be able to listen for connections, which kinda implies you know what you’re doing (ssshh don’t talk about UPnP). Accidental security of a default deny policy even without any firewalls configured. Haha. I’m still getting into this stuff though, please feel free to enlighten me