From: dave@davehigton.me.uk   
      
   In message <10j3tmk$29ec2$1@dont-email.me>   
             Pancho  wrote:   
      
   > On 12/31/25 11:36, The Natural Philosopher wrote:   
   > > On 30/12/2025 20:00, David Higton wrote:   
   > > > What I particularly like about IPv6 is that NAT/NAPT are simply not   
   > > > necessary   
   > >   
   > > So making the implementation of a firewall absolutely mandatory   
   > >   
   >   
   > Linux IPv6 does appear to use random IPv6 address for outbound   
   > connections, which have a limited lifespan. This appears to be something   
   > like 1-7 days, but if very short lifespans were used it could offer a   
   > protection similar to NAT. I need to investigate a bit further, but I   
   > don't think IPv6 needs to be inherently less safe.   
      
   I use Ubuntu, which gives itself two routable IPv6 addresses.  One is   
   always the same (good if you have an internet-accessible server) and   
   the other is new each reboot (good for privacy).  Maybe it's the same   
   for you?   
      
   David   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)