[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Does IPv6 preclude use of a NAT gateway?



On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 07:11:06 -0400, Randy Kramer wrote:

> Thanks to all who responded!  I'll probably respond to several of those
> posts because I didn't mention the other thing I get from NAT--that is,
> I need only one address from my ISP, and I'm pretty sure my doesn't know
> how many computers I have behind my NAT gateway.

You don't have to worry about that. Your ISP will give you the same 
service you already have. Having one -or cents of- IP addresses is a 
plus, a present and you can do with them whatever you want (i.e., you can 
use all of them or not).

IPv6 is something similar like it was dial-up but now with better 
facilities and additions (static IP(s), routers and firewalls).

> I guess I'd assume that if someone writes a NAT66, it will give me the
> same feature, but if that doesn't happen, what are my options?

NAT66 is still reviewed, AFAIK. But yes, it is aimed to be used in the 
same way NAT works for IPv4. But again, you -as standard user- should not 
worry about it. Your dsl device will have at least a firewall and besides 
this, you can also make use of your OS security meassures.
 
> One more comment below:

(...)

>> > It's probably not the best thing, but I depend on the NAT gateway for
>> > a lot of my security--with IPv6, will I still be able to do that?
>>
>> NAT and security do not match. You better put a good firewall and/or
>> IPS system in between ;-)
> 
> Hmm, I need to knock on some wood--wait, I can knock on my head--that is
> about the same ;-)  So far, NAT seemingly has provided pretty good
> security for me.

:-)

Yes, most of us -wrongly- believe that our NATed router is like a wall 
between our computers and the dangerous external web (because indeed it 
is hidding somehow) but this is not a security measure per se but  
security by obfuscation: that we can't see it does not mean we can't 
reach it. There can be still holes in router's firmware or bad configured 
DSL devices that may expose the user regardless NATed or not ;-)

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


Reply to: