369
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

Today in our newest take on "older technology is better": why NAT rules!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Wait.. Do we not like NAT now??

[-] mholiv@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

At the cool network kids hate nat. 😤

[-] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

Boy do we like it!

[-] dan@upvote.au 2 points 1 year ago

NAT is, and has always been, an ugly hack. Why would anyone like it?

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Doesn’t that mean private non-routable subnets like 10.x or 192.x have always been a hack?

[-] orangeboats@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Private addresses don't necessitate NAT. IPv6 also allows private addresses in the form of fd00::/8, like fd00:face:b00b:1::1.

[-] dan@upvote.au 1 points 1 year ago

No, because there's use cases for systems that aren't connected to the internet. Also, public IPs can be dynamic, so you might not want to rely on them internally.

this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
369 points (100.0% liked)

Programmer Humor

24754 readers
1716 users here now

Welcome to Programmer Humor!

This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!

For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.

Rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS