2 ms·

Ask HN: Original implication of IPv6?

2 points by z3phyr 8y ago

I apologize, as this is a fundamental question I got from a school kid (We correspond in a User Group) and it got me into a thought... The early implication of IPv6 was that everyone/everything would get the power to host their own content and be identifiable over a network. It was touted as a boon to distributed internet people; But it didn't turn out as well. I think the main culprit behind this is the NAT, which kinda serves as a control mechanism. Can we get rid of the NAT?? I answered back by stating the usual "Security and Privacy Reasons", but I think there must be something more to it. Network is not one of my specializations. What are your thoughts about it? Also Is there an initiative for a distributed Non-NAT network?

jstewartmobile 8y ago
Last I read, most IPv6 networks in western countries are already NAT-less. There was an IPv6 post a few days ago about how China was surprisingly under-deployed on IPv6. The speculation was that they were sticking to IPv4 and carrier-grade NAT for control purposes. That being said, I'm sure if NAT-less ever starts cutting into the income of our FANGs, they'll surely cook-up some reason to re-introduce NAT to IPv6.