I get the idea, but this isn't necessarily useful as advice and toys with definitions. It's ESPN levels of conversation-baiting. Lots of assumptions can be reasonably made about residential LANs without being true of enterprise LANs/DMZs.
If a residential LAN is RFC1918 and has no NAT, then it is still a LAN... without internet access.
Then the "A & !A" fallacy of "MAC addresses can’t be changed. MAC addresses can be changed."
Just kind of a mess. Would be more interesting to explore the edge cases rather than throw out half-truths and 0.05% instances.
If a residential LAN is RFC1918 and has no NAT, then it is still a LAN... without internet access.
Then the "A & !A" fallacy of "MAC addresses can’t be changed. MAC addresses can be changed."
Just kind of a mess. Would be more interesting to explore the edge cases rather than throw out half-truths and 0.05% instances.
I like the GNOME 2006 era though.