It surprises me in a way that "big internet" (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast etc) and associated large enterprise interests have not been more staunch proponents of IPv6, at least for fixed consumer connections.
It would be trivial in that circumstance to blow away any kind of NAT and the pseudo-anonymity/plausible deniabililty it provides and make client devices performing illegitimate activity directly identifiable.
I wonder if such a ruling might be different in that context. It's a perturbing thought.
It would be trivial in that circumstance to blow away any kind of NAT and the pseudo-anonymity/plausible deniabililty it provides and make client devices performing illegitimate activity directly identifiable.
I wonder if such a ruling might be different in that context. It's a perturbing thought.