Re: [opensuse] Moving to IPv6

Ok, let's try again. Maybe I misled you with my "simple-minded home
user" crack.

On 09/09/2010 01:57 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
...
Eh? Who said to do that? You operate a firewall on your router, just
like you operate your NAT, only it is just a firewall'd router [not a
firewall router and a bunch of NAT hacks].


...which, of course, I already knew. I should have thought you could
understand from my comments that I knew the differences between
firewall, router, private addresses, NAT, and dhcp.

...
That's it. It is categorically simpler. Firewall blocks all incoming
connections - Done. Which is essentially what people on this list
_believe_ NAT is doing currently.


I never believed NAT was doing it (and, really, I seriously doubt that
anyone else in this discussion did, either). I've known all along
exactly what NAT is and how it fits into the Internet. As I thought I
made clear in the large quantity of text that you deleted, now that
previous discussions have convinced me that my needs are not going to
change materially, I'm perfectly content to take up v6 when it comes.

But v4 with NAT does exactly what I need now, and v6 from my point of
view is for you guys who have to deal with the complexities personally.

I was really worried about IPv6 when this topic came up a few months
ago, thinking it would make it much harder for me to maintain what I
have now.

It won't, it will be much easier.


It will be much easier for _you_. It will have little effect on me;
Netgear took care of the complexities for me in _much_ better fashion
than I could have myself. I fully expect Netgear will take care of even
the reduced complexity for me when they sell me my next one. IPv6 makes
things much easier for you and Netgear; it will have little direct
effect on me.


... And only the (restricted
address?) feature saves me from major problems when I have to go to IPv6.

I don't see how, but OK.


I simply don't believe you're not aware enough to have understood what I
was saying. Several other responders did.

It is a necessary evil now, it will be a better network when it is gone.


As I thought I made clear, I agree -- not for my needs, but for yours,
and for the network in general.

My
router with dhcp makes NAT and firewalling Just Work for me and mine.
You want v6; fine. I'll have to go to it soon; fine.
--that is, now that I'm pretty sure v6 won't impose a huge new workload
on my home networking arrangement.



jp

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New modem and iptables...
    ... The router performs firewall and NAT functions ... If you want to persuade me it's a modem, ... it's a router and _it_ has your public Internet address. ... It also does NAT (otherwise you couldn't have a private IP address on ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Would a firewall prevent Sasser worm?
    ... >> the same level of protection that I would have with any NAT router? ... >There are a variety of known attacks which can crash routers, ... >Firewall capability allows you to modify the NAT behaviour to allow selected ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: Would a firewall prevent Sasser worm?
    ... >> the same level of protection that I would have with any NAT router? ... >There are a variety of known attacks which can crash routers, ... >Firewall capability allows you to modify the NAT behaviour to allow selected ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Would a firewall prevent Sasser worm?
    ... >> the same level of protection that I would have with any NAT router? ... >There are a variety of known attacks which can crash routers, ... >Firewall capability allows you to modify the NAT behaviour to allow selected ...
    (alt.computer.security)
  • Re: IP Addressing
    ... Address of the ISA server? ... firewall and router). ... On the firewall create a static NAT entry as I wrote ...
    (comp.dcom.sys.cisco)