6 ms·
They were panicking about IPv4 running out 20 years ago, the amazing inventions of NAT and CIDR meant it never happened. I predict that we’ll be here in 20 year
by goatinaboat 7y ago
They were panicking about IPv4 running out 20 years ago, the amazing inventions of NAT and CIDR meant it never happened. I predict that we’ll be here in 20 years again.
- ehPReth 7y agoamazing?
- dasanman 7y agoNAT is annoying though
- PappaPatat 7y agoFor what real world reasons?
- throwaway2048 7y agoAh, the mythical "real world" where your concerns and requirements don't matter, and mine do.
- GoblinSlayer 7y agoVideo calls.
- C1sc0cat 7y agoNever had a problem doing video calls on ip/v4
- gerdesj 7y agoSIP and RTP are a pain. Long "fixed" but still a pain. ftp still refuses to die and is a pain in active mode. There are others. Only yesterday I had to wheel out Wireshark to prove to a telephony services provider that their bod had forgotten to update a PBX with its changed WAN address.
- superkuh 7y agoIf you look at the mobile telco IPv4 blocks, or lack thereof, you'll see that NAT is here, heavily, almost ubiqitously, as carrier NAT. It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications (lacking routable ipv4) and made them essentially dumb terminals lacking any ability to participate in the 'net. They can only consume other's services.
- PappaPatat 7y agoCan you explain what you mean with "It's destroyed the network functionality of mobile telecommunications"? Since I can think of exactly zero reasons one needs his handheld to be reachable from the Internet (that has not been long solved).
- icebraining 7y agoWhat solution do you know for getting two clients behind CGNAT to talk to each other reliably, without relying on a third-party service?
- vertex-four 7y agoI'd like to be able to communicate with other handhelds without involving a STUN/TURN server, which is hugely unnecessary complexity.
- GoblinSlayer 7y agoDistributed applications and independence from monopolies that aggressively hoard and equally aggressively leak personal data.
- ammmir 7y agoI don't know how I feel about this. IPv6 is the obvious answer, but maybe some kind of NAT is warranted for devices that tend not to have firewalls? If each LTE terminal has a publicly routable IP, unless it's statefully firewalled, any random Internet user who can figure out my IP can run up my data bill, or packet me and inflict a Denial of Service. I remember long ago, some mobile operators in the U.S. were assigning public (non-firewalled) public IPv4 IPs to mobile devices... Attackers were literally scanning Sprint's mobile IP ranges for open port 22 and logging in over SSH as root/aspen to hack jailbroken iPhones!
- C1sc0cat 7y agoOr having a similar conversation about ip v8