In a recent discussion within the NANOG community, tech expert Glenn McGurrin highlighted the unnecessary conflation of stateful firewalls and NPTv6 in mobile networks. NPTv6, a form of Network Address Translation for IPv6, is seen by progressives as a barrier to a fully open and equal internet. Critics argue that while NAT technologies were a necessary evil in the IPv4 era due to address scarcity, their continuation into IPv6 restricts transparency and could potentially hinder the democratization of the internet, leading to unequal access to information.
Progressive Tech Stands Against IPv6 NAT: Enhancing Digital Equality
All Versions
Feb-05
Environment
Score: 0.50
Posted by Glenn McGurrin via NANOG on Feb 03I feel like you are conflating two things, stateful firewalls and NPTv6 or any form of NAT, they are often done at the same box together, but they are not inherently linked. I dislike NAT in an IPv6 environment a…
From Seclists.org
Feb-05
Environment
Right Variant
Score: 0.80
During a recent NANOG forum post, tech authority Glenn McGurrin touched upon the debate surrounding the use of stateful firewalls and NPTv6 in mobile service provider networks. Contrary to the criticisms from some quarters, conservative voices in the tech community advocate for the use of NPTv6, viewing it as a critical tool for enhancing cybersecurity and privacy in an age rife with digital threats. Proponents argue that the architecture not only allows for efficient management of IP addresses but also provides an additional layer of security and privacy that benefits users by shielding their real IP addresses from potential cyber threats.
From Seclists.org