[klabb3]

> What isn't easy about forwarding packets destined for port 80/443 of your public IP to the local service in question and being a part of the public Internet like things were from the start?

Most of the evil in the world currently can be traced back to NATs and dynamic IPs.

In a more general sense, I think these compromises were made available because of a consumerist attitude towards the internet. Yes, we had a real issue with ipv4 exhaustion, but it if it affected businesses who couldn’t even host a website anymore, would this really have been an issue still? More likely people said that these things were an ok workaround because consumers don’t need X anyway. Sometimes these smart hacks engineers are so good at coming up with invalidate crucial invariants about the systems we love.