3 ms·
Totally agree. The UX for IPv6 sucks. Every time I poke with it I get worried I'm exposing the guts of my internal network onto the internet. With NAT, at least
by spookthesunset 5y ago
Totally agree. The UX for IPv6 sucks. Every time I poke with it I get worried I'm exposing the guts of my internal network onto the internet. With NAT, at least I know nothing is getting in without me intentionally punching a hole. With IPv6 to do the same I have to go fiddle with the router's command line interface and rules by hand. And even then who knows if I fucked something up or missed something... its just a lot of work.
There is no web UI for managing IPv6 firewall rules but there is for IPv4. On the consumer grade routers I've touched there isn't even a way to configure the IPv6 firewall rules (and again, they all offer web UX for IPv4 rules).
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Symbiote 5y agoThe interface on the router provided by the UK's largest ISP is almost identical to the interface for IPv4 port forwarding: https://imgur.com/a/NXqwoA6 https://imgur.com/a/NXqwoA6
- spookthesunset 5y agoAwesome! I wish my edgerouter had something like that...