Re: [arin-announce] IPv4 Address Space (fwd)

[Petri Helenius]

Matthew Kaufman wrote:

> End-to-end requires that people writing the software at the end learn about
> buffer overruns (and other data-driven access violations) or program using
> tools that prevent such things. It is otherwise an excellent idea.
>
>  
There is supposedly some magic going into this in the next "Service 
Pack" of a mentioned
major exploding Pinto. Not sure if itīs just flipping the joke of 
firewall on by default or something
more comprehensive/destructive like non-executable stack. Or a 
completely new invention like
bug free code :-)

> Unfortunately, the day that someone decided their poorly-designed machine
> and operating system would be safer sitting behind a "firewall" pretty much
> marked the end of universal end-to-end connectivity, and I don't see it
> coming back for a long long time. Probably not on this Internet. IPv6 or
> not.
>  
Last I checked most "firewall"s donīt make these machines safe, it might 
make them safer,
so only two out of three malwares hit them. Does not really help too much.

> Combine that with ISP pricing models (helped by registry policy) that
> encourage <=1 IP address per household, and the subsequent boom in NAT
> boxes, and the fate is probably sealed. 
>  
Here Iīve observed opposite trend, most ISPīs are getting rid of NATting 
because itīs failure
prone and expensive to implement and keep running.

Pete