Jelte Jansen wrote:
Given that address translation needs things like
CGN, STUN, uPnP and portforwarding to get the most basic of things
working,
Wrong.
While uPnP involves end systems a little, they hide address
translation from the end systems, which is why they destroy
the end to end transparency (with uPnP, there can be the end
to end transparency for applications over TCP or UDP).
I think the whole picture gives you less privacy and security
than a completely untranslated end-to-end world does.
The amount of privacy is same. It is merely that ISPs must have
more log, as long as they assign address/port dynamically on
demand.
But, if ISPs assign one of their customer an address and a range
of port numbers, the amount of log is same.
That is, assigning a customer 192.0.2.1 is not very different
from assigning the customer port 1024 to 1279 of 192.0.2.1.
Masataka Ohta
BTW, now that Microsoft is finally feeling some actual pain due to a
lack of new addresses in their azure cloud, perhaps there is some hope
that some big parties are finally starting to move.
BTW2, tbh i think calling it 32 vs 64/128 bits 'internet' will make it
even more confusing. I'd prefer something like 'ye olde obsolete
adressing'.
Jelte