nanog mailing list archives
Re: Nat
From: Matt Palmer <mpalmer () hezmatt org>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 14:25:13 +1100
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 08:11:53PM -0700, Keith Medcalf wrote:
I agree that a /48 or /56 being reserved for business customers/sites is reasonable. But for residential use, I'm having a hard time believing multi-subnet home networks are even remotely common outside of networking folk such as the NANOG members. A lot of recent IPv4 devices such as smart TVs have the ability to auto-discover things they can talk to on the network. If we start segmenting our home networks to keep toasters from talking to thermostats, doesn't this end up meaning your average home user will need to be proficient in writing FW rules? Bridging an entire house network isn't that bad.I have (currently) 6 network segments. One for my "trusted" clients, one for my "trusted" servers, one for the "entertainment" systems, one for "dirty & untrustworthy" computers (such as those from $dayjob), one for "clean" WiFi, and one for dirty WiFi. If there were any additional classes of devices, they would live in their own subnets as well.
If suspect you probably come under the "networking folk such as NANOG members" exception to the general assertion. - Matt
Current thread:
- RE: Nat, (continued)
- Re: Nat Mike Hammett (Dec 21)
- Re: Nat Matt Palmer (Dec 20)
- Re: Nat Matt Palmer (Dec 20)
- RE: Nat Chuck Church (Dec 20)
- Re: Nat 'Matt Palmer' (Dec 20)
- RE: Nat Jon Lewis (Dec 21)
- Re: Nat Mark Andrews (Dec 20)
- Re: Nat Lee Howard (Dec 18)
- Re: Nat Randy Bush (Dec 17)
- Re: Nat Lee Howard (Dec 18)
- Re: Nat Matthew Newton (Dec 18)
- Re: Nat Sander Steffann (Dec 19)