alt Hacker NewsInvoking NAT "security" as a reason against IPv6 is a surefire indicator the person invoking it has absolutely no idea what they're talking about and should not be allowed within typing distance of any network infrastructure
Replies
Please. _I_ invoked that argument, and I bet I know more about IPv6 than you do.
All my services and networks have IPv6. And my first operational issues with IPv6 were in 2008, when my Asterisk SIP server started failing after ~12 hours.
Culprit? Privacy addresses kept accumulating until they overflowed the SIP UDP packet size because it listed all the combinations of supported codecs/endpoints.
Oh, btw, do try to answer this message: https://www.reddit.com/r/VOIP/comments/131ex1x/ipv6_sip_trun... - it's still relevant to this day.
As a reason not to IPv6? I guess. As a thing, not scare-quoted, but really security? No. Be careful with things like "absolutely no idea what they're talking about".