UPnP/IPv6 support in home routers?

Pete Mundy pete at fiberphone.co.nz
Mon Dec 11 22:09:56 CET 2017

But the FW doesn't (can't) protect the IoT device from other malicious IoT devices sharing the local network behind the firewall.

Isn't it better to forego the boarder firewall completely and make implementing that service the responsibility of each host for itself?


> On 12/12/2017, at 10:00 AM, Fernando Gont <fernando at gont.com.ar> wrote:
> The crap doesn't get fixed because that's the software development we are used to. Windows 10 was Windows '95 in the '90s. So give the IoT stuff 15-20 years to get to a sensible quality/state/security and/or enough widespread trouble/exploitation.
> Pragmatically speaking, people will connect that crap to the 'net... and the "less connected" such devices are, the better.
> So, please, don't remove FWs. :-)
> Cheers,
> Fernando

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20171212/1c117959/attachment.bin 

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list