I see that lemmy.ml is the only major instance currently reachable over IPv6. When will lemmy.world join the modern internet?

  • 2xsaiko
    link
    fedilink
    English
    121 year ago

    In general, you should probably turn on your router’s NAT even for IPv6.

    No, you should not! NAT is not needed with IPv6 and you should never use it unless you really know what you are doing.

    NAT is not a security feature, firewalls are, the default firewall rules from consumer routers are generally enough (allow outgoing, deny incoming except if it’s an existing connection). And if you’re concerned about others tracking hosts inside your network, the default settings of Privacy Extensions makes your device assign itself different IPs for outgoing connections every so often.

      • 2xsaiko
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Learn about which part specifically? I’d argue that IPv6 is essentially IPv4 with reduced complexity (due to stuff like NAT no longer being necessary since address space is large enough). The basics of how smaller connected IPv4 networks work pretty much extends to how IPv6 works across the internet with a few differences such as link-local addresses which are only valid in the same network.

        If you mean Privacy Extensions, that’s part of SLAAC, which is a way of how devices in a network can get an IP address (the other being DHCPv6, which afaik works pretty much like DHCP in IPv4). Here, the router only announces the local network prefix and hosts assign IP addresses themselves, instead of the router assigning an address to each host. This works due to networks usually being a /64 block which is a large enough address space for IP collisions to be very unlikely (and in case they happen, the colliding hosts can resolve that automatically).

        That’s as far as my understanding goes anyway, I’m far from an expert, just someone who has set up a Linux home router from scratch so I’ve had to deal with this stuff :P

    • Redex
      link
      English
      11 year ago

      Thanks for pointing out. By NAT there I meant symmetric NAT which by my understanding would fix that problem as well.

      But you’re right, NAT wouldn’t make sense, you could just add some rules to the firewall.