Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 27, 2004 06:31 AM
The way I see it is as followed:
Pro: 1. ipv6 without NAT is nice so you won't have to search for hours when a certain app won't work because it isn't going through the NAT-ed interface
2. We can communicate with just about everyone on the planet who's online. With a direct connection. The RIAA and Movie industry would probably love this since they have a direct source to attack instead of going through a lot of trouble to find a certain person.
Con: 1. Bye bye privacy
2. Administrative nightmare. Who is gonna hand out the addresses? It will have to be a global organisation. Or am I mistaken and can we still use private ranges?
3. There are millions of clueless people out there who don't even know what security means. They plug their computer on the big net and voila: a total security disaster. With all the worms and virusses spreading already, how long will it take for a worm/virus to spread if it can reach practically everyone? And don't count on Microsoft to write secure software cause it is not gonna happen any time soon. And even if they do, how many clueless "admins" are out there?
4. Spam already accounts for more than 60% of all global email traffic. Imagine what will happen if we start plugging all computers directly to the internet. Spam world.
Sure, a good firewall will probably block a lot of the stuff but I don't think it will get any better by banning NAT. Probably worse.
I'm betting that as soon as everyone starts using ipv6 and no NAT that trafic will probably explode.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
A couple of points
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 27, 2004 06:31 AMPro:
1. ipv6 without NAT is nice so you won't have to search for hours when a certain app won't work because it isn't going through the NAT-ed interface
2. We can communicate with just about everyone on the planet who's online. With a direct connection.
The RIAA and Movie industry would probably love this since they have a direct source to attack instead of going through a lot of trouble to find a certain person.
Con:
1. Bye bye privacy
2. Administrative nightmare. Who is gonna hand out the addresses? It will have to be a global organisation. Or am I mistaken and can we still use private ranges?
3. There are millions of clueless people out there who don't even know what security means. They plug their computer on the big net and voila: a total security disaster. With all the worms and virusses spreading already, how long will it take for a worm/virus to spread if it can reach practically everyone? And don't count on Microsoft to write secure software cause it is not gonna happen any time soon. And even if they do, how many clueless "admins" are out there?
4. Spam already accounts for more than 60% of all global email traffic. Imagine what will happen if we start plugging all computers directly to the internet. Spam world.
Sure, a good firewall will probably block a lot of the stuff but I don't think it will get any better by banning NAT. Probably worse.
I'm betting that as soon as everyone starts using ipv6 and no NAT that trafic will probably explode.
#