You are not wrong. There is no consistent way to do this today -- most of it is in debate, and there is no standard. The most reliable way is to rely on your s

You are not wrong. There is no consistent way to do this today -- most of it is in debate, and there is no standard. The most reliable way is to rely on your system firewall to prompt you to open up a port when an application binds to it (which can be accomplished with the default firewall software on a modern system.) Again, this is technically possible with IPv4 too, it's just impractical due to address space limitations. > there is no protocol that allows me to allocate addresses per application on a central home router Correct. But the whole point it to take the router out of the loop for this, and only use it as a coarse firewall. With IPv6 very device gets a separate /64, so it can simply allocate from its own pool of 10^19 addresses. > And applications punching holes via APIs does exist in uPnP and NAT-PMP, but isn't that the same thing as what you dismissed above as a hack? Not the same. With IPv6, you do not need to coordinate across multiple NAT devices (or even worse if you're double/triple NATted as in some countries.) You're also not limited by the maximum NAT table sizes (again amplified in the double/triple NATted situations.) Since each system has 10^19 addresses (preallocated out of a global pool of 10^38 addresses), these can now be treated as system resources and managed intelligently by the kernel.