We already knew that the poorer countries are impacted worse by the IPv4 shortages.
CG-NAT didn't solve anything but only delayed long enough to do even more damage.
Now these already poor countries also have to do CG-NAT, which is very expensive.
They cannot afford this.
I guess that a poor country could go with only IPv6?
Local services would be IPv6-only as well and most popular services already have IPv6.
And everyone else would have to make this switch eventually, so there'd be benefits...
DNS blocking works better than IP address based blocking because you can block domains and hosts instead of IP addresses. And it still blocks the domain/host even if its IP address changes.
Generally blocking DNS names works well for server-side blocking. But client IPs either do not have associated domain names, and even if there's a hostname associated with a client IP it'd cover all the clients behind the same public IP so the problem remains.
3 comments
[ 5.3 ms ] story [ 21.3 ms ] threadI guess that a poor country could go with only IPv6? Local services would be IPv6-only as well and most popular services already have IPv6. And everyone else would have to make this switch eventually, so there'd be benefits...