14 May
2017
14 May
'17
6:24 a.m.
The reason I prefer IPv6 over IPv4 NAT is it gives me
the option to use
the same ports on multiple hosts on my network. IPv4 NAT is quite
crippling for some of ujs (who also happen to know how to manage our
firewalls ;) ).
Yes of course NAT is a pain when doing special things, but for most internet
users it is not a problem at all. Especially now that the internet has evolved
from a peer-to-peer network into a traditional client-server network where a few
big companies run all the services and the users connect only to there, even when
they want to communicate with another user.
What I like about IPv6 is that it gives me out-of-band management of IPv4
networks. Yesterday I did a major restructuring of our AMPRnet-Internet
gateway, where a MikroTik CCR has been added to the existing PC Linux solution to
take over part of the services, and I could make all the network topology changes
with confidence that I would not lock myself out, using IPv6. That is also handy
when managing the very complicated IPv4 firewall.
In fact so many users have been completely accustomed to NAT that they even apply
it to AMPRnet... Putting their systems on RFC1918 addresses and translating it to
net-44 addresses in the router. I would not do that...
Rob