Reply to post: Re: IPv6 not that hard... seriously

We are absolutely, definitively, completely and utterly out of IPv4 addresses, warns RIPE

gnarlymarley Bronze badge

Re: IPv6 not that hard... seriously

However, the one thing people aren't fully aware of (apparently) is that every IPv6 address that can be used to access 'teh intarwebs' is public.

Did I miss something here? RFC4193 talks about "private addresses" for IPv6, which will also include NAT66. I am sorry that you think this is the reason why you don't want to go to IPv6. I have successfully been using NAT on IPv6 for many years now. My IPv6 router is running FreeBSD. I first started with NAT66 on FreeBSD version 5.2.

So that means windows machines MUST be properly firewalled

One side note if you look further into it is your NAT router in IPv4 actually has a firewall to make the NAT work. (IPtables, PF, and IPFW are all firewalls that will redirect their packets to the NAT software. You will have one of these running on your wireless router.) So by claiming, you need a firewall to go to IPv6 is a cop out.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019