[cm2187]

Out of curiosity (I live in the UK, a country that does not believe in adopting new technologies less than 5y after everyone else), with IPv6, there is no need for a NAT anymore. Will the local networks be directly on the WAN? Will be interesting from a security/privacy point of view. Unless routers act as firewall, in which case we are back to square 1...

[calpaterson]

Most home routers already act as an inbound firewall. Regarding "back to square 1" - the aim of IPv6 is not to expose thousands of poorly secured LAN devices to the public net - it's to restore the point-to-point nature of the internet. I would still expect most LANs to be firewalled when IPv6 is adopted

[e12e]

Just to expand on that, with IP6, it would make sense to simply give every router, DSL "modem" etc a [ed: theoretically, publicly] routable ipv6 subnet. This makes (in theory) everything easier: the firewall can simply block/allow -- no need for long chains of NAT-rules. It might make networks marginally more transparent -- but it really means very little in terms of security. Nor really for privacy.

[chimeracoder]

Addressable != routable.

Think of a doorman for a luxury building or a gated community. The people living inside have publicly available addresses, but knowing the addreses doesn't mean that the doorman will automatically let you through to go visit.

[CSDude]

You will still need a router at home, and it can still filter any packets coming in/going out, even if the connected devices have globally accesible addresses. So, there should not be a huge problem.