Post #2334820
2026-04-18 14:40 UTC
@ghostinthenet@hachyderm.io I think the "lack of peer to peer connectivity" is a feature of NAT, not a bug. Most home networks contain far more devices than could have been foreseen when IPv6 was thought up, and they're all far less secure. Computers and other devices can't be trusted to "just be on the internet". That's how we get bot nets.
Replies (1)
-
@ghostinthenet@hachyderm.io 2026-04-18 15:51
@furrfu@mastodon.social That has nothing to do with #NAT. That's just stateful inspection, which existed before NAT was invented. NAT overload (and •only• NAT overload) requires stateful inspection and almost always embeds it, but it’s an independent function from translation. NAT's purpose is to alleviate address exhaustion and nothing more. My home router has a stateful firewall for IPv6 and it provides the same benefits you’re attributing to NAT without doing any translation at all. #NATisNotSecurity