Summary: In today’s IPv6 Buzz we answer listener questions about our favorite addressing protocol, including<br> <br> * I thought NAT was necessary for security? Isn’t my network less secure without NAT at the edge?<br> * I tend to disable IPv6 whenever I can. Is that bad?<br> * How feasible is it to scan an IPv6 network to discover devices?<br> <br> Thanks for listening (and keep the questions coming)!<br> Show Links:<br> <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4864" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RFC 4864: Local Network Protection for IPv6</a> – IETF<br> <a href="https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6724" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">RFC 6724: Default Address Selection for IPv6</a> – IETF<br> <a href="https://community.infoblox.com/t5/IPv6-CoE-Blog/3-Ways-to-Ruin-Your-Future-Network-with-IPv6-Unique-Local/ba-p/5663" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">3 Ways to Ruin Your Future Network with IPv6 Unique Local Addresses</a> – Infoblox<br> Your Hosts:<br> <br> * <a href="https://twitter.com/ehorley" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Ed Horley @ehorley</a><br> * <a href="https://twitter.com/ipv6tom" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Tom Coffeen @ipv6tom</a><br> * <a href="https://twitter.com/scotthogg" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Scott Hogg @scotthogg</a><br> <br>
