[mythtv] Proposed change to Network Communications

[Mark Perkins]

On 10 March 2017 8:34:43 AM rudy zijlstra 
<mythtv at grumpydevil.homelinux.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 08-03-17 19:30, Karl Dietz wrote:
>> On 08.03.2017 13:36, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>>> security implications of transitioning from "NAT security" (for
>>
>> this is the point. "transition from some security to no security"
>>
>> There is a perimeter device that currently implement IPv4 perimeter
>> security with a method that goes by the name "IPv4 NAT Firewall" or
>> similar. (lets not get into details)
>> When the provider of this perimeter device now implements IPv6 its up
>> to them to also implement some IPv6 perimeter security. Maybe with a
>> "real firewall" or whatever.
> All operator provided gateways i am aware of that implement IPv6 also
> implement an IPv6 firewall. The default setting is to block all traffic
> inbound into the home network that is not requested. In other words,
> the default is that, in firewall terms, only RELATED traffic is allows
> in from the internet.
>
> Cheers
>
> Rudy

I apologise in advance if I am heading off topic but wouldnt a firewall 
like that block me from SSH 'ing into my servers or block any home Web 
servers from operating? Maybe the firewall will be end user configurable or 
opt in / out.