The question above for the most part, been reading up on it. Also want to it for learning purposes.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    il y a 1 an

    Thank you!!

    If you don’t want your devices to be accessible from the internet, you want a firewall. Treating NAT like a firewall is a bad idea.

    • Nilz@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      il y a 1 an

      But still, if I understand correctly, with NAT you can just use one firewall for your router and with IPv6 you’d need a firewall for each of your devices. This seems like a lot more to manage, right? But maybe I still don’t understand the concept of IPv6.

      Edit: Apparently I don’t understand the concept of IPv6.

      • gedhrel@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        il y a 1 an

        That’s not correct, but it shouldn’t preclude you from applying defence in depth.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        il y a 1 an

        Firewall and NAT are separate concepts. You can still have a firewall on your router when using IPv6. I don’t know how many consumer-grade routers handle it well though.