On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 11:16 AM William Herrin <b...@herrin.us> wrote: > > There isn't really an advantage to using v4 NAT. > I disagree with that one. Limiting discussion to the original security > context (rather than the wider world of how useful IPv6 is without > IPv4), IPv6 is typically delivered to "most people" without border > security, while IPv4 is delivered with a stateful NAT firewall.
Maybe this is the disconnect. Who delivers v6 without a firewall? I've done a lot of T-Mobile and Comcast business connections lately, and those certainly both provide a firewall on v4 and v6. I'll admit I'm not currently well-versed in other providers (except ones that don't provide v6 at all...). It is possible to order Comcast without a firewall for v6, in which case you receive a public v4 address without protection too. What common scenario leads to your average person being unprotected on the v6 Internet?
