undefined

points

[-]

You're assuming there is only one internet connection in my home network, for example. The "easy" trick where your ISP gives you routable addresses does not work when there's more than one exit.

Still want to help? :)

And really... everyone is pushing for SSL everywhere - among other things so that the ISP doesn't MITM your traffic.

Why would you allow the ISP to know what machines are inside your home network then?

by 9dev2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

This doesn’t change anything about the NAT or firewall story, and having two different connections is complex with IPv4 just as well. Aside from being a fairly exotic setup for personal use anyway.

What would your ISP do with the information that there are 73 unique addresses in your network at this point in time? Especially given that devices may mint any number of them for different reasons, so you can’t even really assume that corresponds to the number of physical devices in your network?

by nottorp2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> Aside from being a fairly exotic setup for personal use anyway.

So I should cancel one of my pipes because the "commitee" overcomplicated things in the name of autoconfiguration?

> What would your ISP do with the information that there are 73 unique addresses in your network at this point in time?

Sell it of course. Good info for targeting marketing/political propaganda per household.

> I haven’t seen a bog-standard router yet that didn’t just do it out of the box.

Which one, the one from ISP A or the one from ISP B? :)

by 9dev2 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> So I should cancel one of my pipes because the "commitee" overcomplicated things in the name of autoconfiguration?

That is absolutely not what I said. It’s a more complex setup than a single connection with either protocol, and can be solved with both.

> Which one, the one from ISP A or the one from ISP B? :)

Realistically it is going to return an A record with both addresses, maybe also the link-local one, any works locally. That is a non-issue.