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

  • FrostyCaveman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year 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

    • mholiv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think you have Stockholm syndrome. You just like what you already understand well. It’s a normal part of the human condition.

      All those features of nat also work with IPV6 with no nat in the exact same way. When I want to open up a port I just make a new firewall rule. Plus you get the advantages of being able to address the ach host behind the firewall. It’s a huge win with no losses.