Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #5088

Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall

From Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de>
Newsgroups comp.os.linux.networking
Subject Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall
Date 2022-02-13 13:51 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <20220213135148.0dc315e6@ryz> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <20220209230421@news.eternal-september.org> <su2kpj$1gb44$1@news1.tnib.de> <9eoNJ.42368$%uX7.41616@fx38.iad> <20220211094118.25fc3210@ryz> <suanni$gn6$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

Am Sonntag, 13. Februar 2022, um 11:49:22 Uhr schrieb David Brown:

> On 11/02/2022 09:41, Marco Moock wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 11. Februar 2022, um 07:28:05 Uhr schrieb Mike Mocha:
> >   
> >> Thanks for all the responses!  Something that still is not making
> >> sense to me, if for example we have a home network that contains
> >> many different IPv6 devices connected, how do we control what
> >> ports get exposed on each device?  
> > 
> > The concept of the internet (IPv4 and IPv6) is that every device
> > has an unique address that is reachable from any other node.   
> 
> That /was/ the original idea - back when IP networking was for a few
> specialised uses such as military research, universities, and a few
> niche companies.  Such a concept does not scale to today's networking
> needs, and that has /nothing/ to do with the number of IPv4 addresses.

They scale very well if you have enough addresses available. It is much
easier because you don't need a NAT/PAT table nor create concepts for
interconnecting LANs with RF1918 address etc.

> It is a /long/ time since computers and users have had the level of
> trust that existed then.  With more software, has come more security
> holes.  The average level of knowledge of users has dropped as
> computers arrived on every desk, not just the desks of experts.
> 
> The number of connected nodes has increased dramatically over the
> decades.  Unique addressing is not the issue - it's an irrelevancy.  A
> system where any node can address any other node simply does not
> scale.

It does very well, a home customer has about 2^64 addresses available.
Tell me what you can't do with that.

> So what we have is a somewhat hierarchical system - basically on two
> levels.  There is the "internet" which supports wide-range access and
> routing, with many servers directly on that network.  And there is
> there are countless local networks with interaction within the
> network, and access to internet-based servers, but with no need for
> anything outside to get in.

Why do we need a hierarchical system here?
If we want addresses for local-only services we can use ULA. also more
than enough addresses available for all your needs.

> Rounded to the nearest tenth of a percent, all computers are
> client-only.  (Yes, the remaining fraction that act as servers is
> important.)  They are mobile phones, home computers, work desktops,
> etc. All of these need to be able to access servers on the internet.

That is what big companies and providers tells us. Everybody that wants
to use VoIP without any problems needs to be reachable from the outside.

> /None/ of them need to be accessed by any other computer.  The only
> time something tries to directly access them, is an attack from some
> hacker, worm or other malware.  No one wants that, or to make that
> easier.

Then they can operate an SPI firewall. Windows has one enabled by
default, most home routers have one enabled.

> Of course you can say that it is the job of the firewall to block
> incoming connections while allowing packets of established connections
> to pass through from the internet.  But when the firewall is already
> doing this connection tracking, it can also do NAT'ing at little cost.
> That then makes the routing process upstream /hugely/ easier.

Why should it do NAT?
What makes it better in the routing?
I see no benefit at all.

> What benefit would there be from each device having a unique IP
> address that is used directly, without NAT?  The device would /not/
> be reachable from any other node - if you think that would be a good
> thing, with every hacker on the other side of the globe having direct
> access to your grandma's mobile, you are living on a different planet.

The grandma's router has an SPI fw enabled. Grandma's Windows has an
SPI FW enabled by default, so no problem.
If you have a good operating system, no server software runs on the
public addresses. Then there is also no problem at all without NAT or
an SPI fw.

> The only people that would see this as a direct benefit are the
> Facebooks of the world, and the porn-site based scammers and
> blackmailers.  (That includes "legitimate" porn sites that get hacked
> by scammers and blackmailers.)  They'd love to know /exactly/ which
> computer was used, as accurately as possible, rather than seeing
> common router IP addresses.

Because of proxy servers and NAT companies like Facebook and Google
created other methods of tracking. They use User Agents, Cookies,
Browser storage to identify a user, they don't need an unique IP
address.

> > NAT and all that
> > crap are just temporary solutions for keeping IPv4 alive.   
> 
> NAT is a fine example of the flexibility of IP networking, and does a
> fine job of helping compartmentalise and modularise the network.  It
> is also extremely easy to have a simple NAT setup - these days pretty
> much every home has a NAT router with Wifi, that comes out of the box
> with a setup that provides a basic level of security for the home
> (except for the NAT routers that have hopeless default passwords).

NAT first creates a flexibility and then you see how bad it is. Think
about DNS with servers that have private addresses and should have a
host name. You then need NAT hairpinning and other nasty stuff.

> In the days of dial-up, people would take their Windows XP machines
> and connect directly to the internet, getting a global IP that was
> reachable from any node.  Their machine would be taken over by
> hostile hackers and bots long before it had managed to download the
> latest service packs and updates, which at best only blocked half the
> attacks anyway.  Now they connect their new Windows machines to their
> NAT router, and /no/ attacks get in (until they do something stupid,
> like click on a phishing email link).

The main problem of that is that Windows has enabled server software
like NetBIOS over IP and SMB. This is the problem and NAT/SPI should
now solve the biggest security problem that MS was able to create?
Personally, I don't care anymore about windows machines because they
are insecure by design.

> > We should
> > switch to IPv6 ASAP.
> >   
> There are certainly cases where a greater availability of globally
> unique addresses would be helpful.  While almost all computers are not
> servers, /some/ are, and sometimes a unique address on the internet
> would be handy.
> 
> I see some benefits to IPv6, but not enough to bother much about it as
> yet.  And when I do start using it seriously, it will be with NAT.

Then do it if you like a really bad network infrastructure.
What I wanna is that I can switch off IPv4 at all at my side without
having problems to connect to other's servers.

Back to comp.os.linux.networking | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

IPv6 Hardware Firewall Mike Mocha <mocha@mailexcite.com> - 2022-02-09 08:16 +0000
  Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-09 10:01 +0100
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-09 11:18 +0100
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Mike Scott <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> - 2022-02-09 15:17 +0000
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-09 16:39 +0100
  Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-09 11:16 +0100
  Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-09 16:54 +0000
  Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-09 17:57 -0700
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-10 08:27 +0100
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 10:59 -0700
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 19:14 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-10 20:39 +0100
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 20:25 +0000
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 14:45 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 22:24 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 12:49 -0700
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 20:48 +0000
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 14:46 -0700
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-10 10:08 +0100
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 11:01 -0700
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 19:15 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 12:44 -0700
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-10 21:34 +0100
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 14:01 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-11 14:22 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 11:27 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-12 10:49 +0100
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2022-02-13 19:43 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-13 21:14 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-14 08:47 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 11:48 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-15 20:08 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 12:19 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-15 21:09 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 18:09 -0700
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 20:43 +0000
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 14:06 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-10 21:54 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-11 14:22 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-11 14:34 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 11:35 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-11 19:39 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 12:06 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-12 10:50 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-12 19:36 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-13 07:55 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2022-02-13 03:59 -0600
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-13 14:02 -0800
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2022-02-13 18:05 -0600
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-15 09:13 -0800
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Bit Twister <BitTwister@mouse-potato.com> - 2022-02-15 11:36 -0600
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-15 20:32 -0800
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall "David W. Hodgins" <dwhodgins@nomail.afraid.org> - 2022-02-15 23:39 -0500
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-13 13:52 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 11:50 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-15 20:09 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 11:29 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-12 10:52 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-12 19:40 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-13 13:58 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 11:53 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-16 09:28 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-16 13:04 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 21:17 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-17 10:59 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-13 14:05 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 11:56 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-15 20:11 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 12:17 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-16 09:29 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-16 13:08 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-17 11:00 +0100
  Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-10 04:08 +0000
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-10 08:30 +0100
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 10:56 -0700
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-10 19:49 +0100
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 12:13 -0700
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-11 04:07 +0000
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2022-02-10 21:33 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-10 14:48 -0700
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 01:20 +0000
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-11 09:35 +0100
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 11:45 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-11 20:03 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-11 12:14 -0700
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-12 00:33 +0000
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-12 09:27 +0100
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-12 10:54 +0100
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-12 11:01 +0100
              OT Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-12 12:06 -0800
                Re: OT Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-12 21:39 +0100
                Re: OT Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-13 13:27 -0800
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-14 02:12 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-14 02:06 +0000
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-15 09:14 -0800
    Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-10 10:10 +0100
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Mike Mocha <mocha@mailexcite.com> - 2022-02-11 07:28 +0000
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-11 09:41 +0100
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-12 00:38 +0000
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-13 11:49 +0100
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-13 13:51 +0100
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-13 14:54 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-13 15:31 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-13 14:07 -0800
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 12:25 -0700
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 12:15 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-15 21:18 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-15 18:18 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 16:24 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-16 13:16 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-17 11:03 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-17 10:20 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-16 01:53 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-16 09:37 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-16 19:50 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-17 11:41 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-17 21:22 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 16:26 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-16 16:48 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 19:13 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-16 19:15 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-16 20:56 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 21:18 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-17 11:06 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-17 10:27 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-18 08:26 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-18 12:05 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-18 10:41 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-18 10:43 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-18 20:20 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-18 20:34 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-18 13:46 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-19 10:03 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-19 17:03 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-20 07:39 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-20 08:52 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-20 14:05 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-20 22:50 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-20 18:10 -0800
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-21 08:16 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-21 08:57 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-21 18:41 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-21 11:31 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-21 21:09 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-22 16:44 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-20 08:51 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-19 17:11 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-20 07:41 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-19 17:13 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-20 07:42 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-18 20:33 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-18 20:47 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-19 10:03 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-18 10:35 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-18 20:36 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-18 13:41 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-19 07:43 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-19 10:08 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-19 10:07 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-19 17:08 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-16 13:01 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> - 2022-02-16 19:12 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-17 09:12 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> - 2022-02-17 10:31 -0700
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-18 09:25 +0100
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-17 21:21 +0000
                Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-02-18 09:25 +0100
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall meff <email@example.com> - 2022-02-11 10:28 +0000
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2022-02-11 10:56 +0000
      Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-12 00:36 +0000
        Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-12 10:56 +0100
          Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2022-02-14 02:15 +0000
            Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> - 2022-02-14 08:52 +0100
              Re: IPv6 Hardware Firewall jrg <jeff.g.group@att.net> - 2022-02-15 09:16 -0800

csiph-web