If you compare with excel or similar. They do not write excel the program. But there is a lot of tinkering with algorithms and functions to get the wanted results.
If you compare with excel or similar. They do not write excel the program. But there is a lot of tinkering with algorithms and functions to get the wanted results.
From other countries that have regulations: prevent known criminals, known serious mentally ill people, known abusers, from having guns. Enforce gun lockers, and responsible ownership. Enforce education and training.
Most countries still have guns you know. Even just the gun lockers would prevent the us rampant murdering toddlers.
You have my sympathy. I do not know of a sure way to get isp’s to behave. Espesially not if they have regional monopoly
Thank you! :) I also notice i compleatly forgot the port exhaustion issue we see with larger networks behind roo few ipv4 NAT addresses…
I guess I am lucky. 3 out of 3 isp’s available from in my region provide IPv6 with a dhcp-pd assigned stable address by default. (Norway)
If there is a ipv6 service online. That you want to reach from a v4 only client. You can set up a fixed 1:1 nat on your firewall where you define a fake internal ipv4 address -> destination NAT onto the public ipv6 address of the service. And SRC NAT64 embed your clients internal v4 into the source ipv6 for the return traffic. And provide a internal dns view A record pointing to the fake internal ip record. It would work, but does not scale very well. Since you would have to set this up for every ipv6 ip.
A better solution would be to use a dualstack SOCKS5 proxy with dns forwarding where the client would use the IPv6 of the proxy for the connection. But that does not use NAT tho.
The best solution is to deploy IPv6 ofcourse. ;)
That is not how it works. You can have a home network on ipv6. And it can reach all of ipv4 via nat ( just like ipv4 do today). A net with only ipv4 can not reach any ipv6 without a proxy that terminst the v4 connection and make a new v6 connection. since ipv6 is backwards compatible. But ipv4 is naturally not forwards compatible.
Also it is the default deny of the stateful firewall that always coexist with NAT, since NAT depends on that state, that is the security in a NAT router.
That default deny is not in any way dependant on the NAT part.
But DNS rarely break. The meme about it beeing DNS’s fault is more often then not just a symptom of the complexity of IPv4 NAT problem.
If i should guesstimate i think atleast 95% of the dns issues i have ever seen, are just confusion of what dns views they are in. confusion of inside and outside nat records. And forgetting to configure the inside when doing the outside or vice verca. DNS is very robust and stable when you can get rid of that complexity.
That beeing said, there are people that insist on obscurity beeing security (sigh) and want to keep doing dns views when using IPv6. But even then things are much easier when the result would be the same in either view.
I assume the normal fear of unknown things. It is hard to hate ipv6 once you have equivalent competence in ipv4 and ipv6.
I felt dirty! and broke so much shit when i had to implement NAT on networks in the mid 90’s. Nowdays with ipv6 and getting rid of NAT is much more liberating. The difference is staggering!
Now the greatest and best effect of ipv6 is none of the above. It is that with ipv6 we have a slim hope of reclaiming some of what made the Internet GREAT in the first place. When we all stood on equal footing. Anyone could host their own service. Now we are all vassals of the large companies that have made the common person into a CGNAT4444 using consumer mindlessly lapping up what the large company providers sees fit to provide us. with no way to even try to be a real and true part of the Internet. Fight the companies that want to make you a eyeball in their statistic, Set up your own IPv6 service on the Internet today !
China block much of the internet so who knows with china. Do not know if anyone have real china numbers of IPv6 deployment. They also had their own “IPv9” that was rumored some years ago that may or may not have been used internally.
Not much choise i guess. Usa and europe grabbed the majority of available ipv4 space. Asia got a bit. And only scraps and leftovers for africa and latin america.
You do as well, if you run any operating system newer then the last 10 years.
That should simply not be allowed. Cgnat for ipv4 is fine if they also provide proper ipv6
Yes it does take extra work. Problem is often that that work was done in the past when isp implemented their ipv4 metodology. And instead of using the ipv6 rollout as a chance to improve their design and operations. They just add ipv6 into their ipv4 design and methodology. They encumber their ipv6 rollout with their decades of technical debt and cruft they have normalized in their ipv4 world. And it will makes things harder for themselfs when trying to turn off ipv4 in the core.
Goverments (depending on juristiction) have laws requiering isp’s to keep track of cgnat port combos. So not only is there no privacy from ipv4 cgnat. Now the isp must also spend a lot of money on the nat state tracking database.
If you need that kind of privacy, use a vpn and the tor onion network.
I am 50/50 between incompetence. Or so they can keep on charging extra for a static ip.
What anyone mean when they say get rid of dst is to stop the flipflopping.
But i guess you are technically right. Witch i have heard is the best kind of right. Even if very pedantic ;)
I would not mind if americans used whatever. As long as anything exported from america always!! used metric. As it is now we need 2 complete sets of nuts and bolts, pipes and fittings, tools and gizmos, csbles and connectors. Just imagine the space we could save in our shops and storages if we could /2 the requires spare part storage. Not to mention the time and frustration avoided when doing basically anything on almost anything.
Guess the issue is that us big bads are blocked in china. So while ccp can leverage social media to monitor western countries. Western goverments can not leverage western social media to do the same in china.