[ipv6hackers] Is there a telecom company which adpated IPv6 network on LTE?

[Marco Ermini]

On 15 August 2013 15:21, Tore Anderson wrote:
[...]

>  This varies from country to country actually. FWIW there's no tradition
> in Norway for doing NAT in the mobile network. To avoid the overbilling
> problem the operators instead have deployed a stateful firewall that
> drops unsolicited inbound traffic. You can usually change the APN name
> from "internet" to "internet.public" in order to accept unsolicited
> inbound traffic though.
>
> That said, NAT44 is coming nowadays (I understand the incumbent has
> started doing it for all Apple devices already), but reason for this is
> due to there not being enough IPv4 addresses to go around, and not for
> any reasons related to security or billing.
>
> Tore
>

It may be that there are simpler implementation in some countries with no
strict legal requirements, but in general I agree, NAT is not initiated by
security departments, although security departments will still complain if
you try to take it away. And yes it helps with overbilling and battery
drowning attacks - doing NAT/PAT is much more straightforward than
maintaining a complex firewall ruleset.

As hinted, when something is NATted it can be more easy to log as well. In
some countries this is required... as well as other things such as age
verification/restriction and other access layer controls, or other services
such as content optimisation and caching - everything helped by NAT, and
that needs to be re-thought in a full flat IPv6 World. Not a simple journey.


Cheers
-- 
Marco Ermini
root at human # mount -t life -o ro /dev/dna /genetic/research
http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcoermini
"Jesus saves... but Buddha makes incremental back-ups!"