[AusNOG] [Ap-ipv6tf] official shutdown date for IPv4. The date he is pushing for is April 4, 2024. "IPv4 can't go on forever, " Latour said. "

[Roland Dobbins]

On 5 Nov 2014, at 13:47, Ross Wheeler wrote:

> If they can't "update" their system, don't "GET" the bit about having 
> to keep AV software up-to-date etc, how the HELL can we expect them to 
> secure IPv6?  (Hint: we can't)

Eliminating NAT doesn't mean eliminating network access policies.  It 
doesn't preclude automagic provisioning of said policies, nor 
transparent stateful firewalling (appropriate for client-type machines, 
but not for servers).

And even with NAT, which causes huge problems for ordinary users, much 
less network operators and server/app/service operators, we've all these 
hundreds of millions of compromised, botted hosts worldwide.  The 
majority of botted hosts are compromised via layer-7 techniques which 
leverage social engineering; NAT does nothing about that.

NAT is not a security technology.  NAT does not materially benefit 
security in any way.  NAT is in fact a detriment to actual, 
operationalizable security.

Unfortunately, the widespread misperception that NAT is a 'security' 
technology means that it won't go away - which is really too bad.

-----------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net>