Hacker News Reader

Comment by gnaritas | Hacker News Reader

They won't need to, there's plenty of space in the private range in IPv4 to put everything in my house on the net. IPv6 isn't going to make firewalls and private networks go away, people aren't going to just put everything directly on the Internet with a public IP just because they can just as no one gives every PC on their network now live IP's.

View on HN

I would not risk depleting my home network address pool either. What if I want to connect 4 billion + 1 washing machines?

I thought that nobody gives every pc on their network live IPs because we're out of IPs?

Why wouldn't you give everything its own unique IP and then limit access via firewalls? NAT just makes p2p a huge pain.

I think that he means that he is putting everything on the private IP range: 192.168.* .* .

Which means you'll have to use NAT to control your teapot from the office.

Are you brave enough to put your tea-making facilities in the DMZ? That's laying it on the line, man. Personally I think I would reverse proxy my teapot through nginx, I don't trust a TCP/IP stack embedded in a kitchen appliance.

I would like to take this opportunity to direct your attention towards the venerable http://nicecupofteaandasitdown.com which is both splendid and written by a hacker. I think you can tell when you get to the page with the venn diagram of biscuits.

The TCP/IP stack in that NetBSD toaster is >= as secure as your laptop/desktop.

The hypothetical Hot Beverages As A Service device that exists only in my head doesn't use NetBSD, it uses a custom standalone stack running on a PIC/AVR. So there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com