8 ms·

I don't understand. You could still run a router that performs NAT. Is there something about IPv6 that makes running NAT intrinsically harder than IPv4 and more

by usui 5y ago

I don't understand. You could still run a router that performs NAT. Is there something about IPv6 that makes running NAT intrinsically harder than IPv4 and more susceptible to corporate overlords?

rhn_mk1 5y ago
A data point: I think OpenWRT simply does not bother making it easy.
HWR_14 5y ago
If I'm using NAT, I don't need IPv6. And IPv6 NAT is, for some reason, still buggy. So yes, if I go to IPv6, I could get a worse version of what I have now.
- usui 5y ago
  Well the second and third points seem valid. The first point though, I don't get? You are forced to use NAT now. If IPv6 were the standard, and assuming that the implementation of NAT was fine, then you could have the choice of both. Since you prefer to keep NAT, I'm not sure why you'd need to stop using it if IPv6 rolls out? Are you saying that because we're forced to use IPv4 now, you're more accepting of NAT?
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    No, I'm saying I want to use NAT. IPv4 NAT is better than IPv6 NAT (less buggy). Therefore I want to use IPv4. It's pretty much only one point. But I still haven't heard an advantage of IPv6. It would let me avoid NAT, which is why people tolerate a buggy NAT implementation. But I don't want to. It's like telling a Yankees fan that one of the perks of his new job is season tickets to the Red Sox. (I hope I got the teams correct)
    - perryizgr8 5y ago
      > But I still haven't heard an advantage of IPv6. That's my original point. Ipv6 makes NAT obsolete and useless. That is enough of a benefit to use it over Ipv4.
      - evgen 5y ago
        You seem to be failing at reading comprehension here. As has been repeated a couple of times, but once again in all caps for emphasis: SOME PEOPLE WANT TO USE NAT TO OBSCURE DEVICES ON THEIR NETWORK. Period. End of story. That IPv6 makes nat 'useless' is not a point in its favour or a benefit. That IPv6 NAT is inferior to IPv4 NAT makes IPv4 preferable and IPv6 something to be avoided for people who have this particular use case.
        usui 5y ago
        So if IPv6 NAT worked as well as IPv4 NAT/was not buggy, you would be fine switching in a hyoothetical IPv6 mandate?

by usui 5y ago

I don't understand. You could still run a router that performs NAT. Is there something about IPv6 that makes running NAT intrinsically harder than IPv4 and more susceptible to corporate overlords?

rhn_mk1 5y ago

A data point: I think OpenWRT simply does not bother making it easy.

HWR_14 5y ago

If I'm using NAT, I don't need IPv6. And IPv6 NAT is, for some reason, still buggy. So yes, if I go to IPv6, I could get a worse version of what I have now.

usui 5y ago
Well the second and third points seem valid. The first point though, I don't get? You are forced to use NAT now. If IPv6 were the standard, and assuming that the implementation of NAT was fine, then you could have the choice of both. Since you prefer to keep NAT, I'm not sure why you'd need to stop using it if IPv6 rolls out? Are you saying that because we're forced to use IPv4 now, you're more accepting of NAT?
- HWR_14 5y ago
  No, I'm saying I want to use NAT. IPv4 NAT is better than IPv6 NAT (less buggy). Therefore I want to use IPv4. It's pretty much only one point. But I still haven't heard an advantage of IPv6. It would let me avoid NAT, which is why people tolerate a buggy NAT implementation. But I don't want to. It's like telling a Yankees fan that one of the perks of his new job is season tickets to the Red Sox. (I hope I got the teams correct)
  - perryizgr8 5y ago
    > But I still haven't heard an advantage of IPv6. That's my original point. Ipv6 makes NAT obsolete and useless. That is enough of a benefit to use it over Ipv4.
    - evgen 5y ago
      You seem to be failing at reading comprehension here. As has been repeated a couple of times, but once again in all caps for emphasis: SOME PEOPLE WANT TO USE NAT TO OBSCURE DEVICES ON THEIR NETWORK. Period. End of story. That IPv6 makes nat 'useless' is not a point in its favour or a benefit. That IPv6 NAT is inferior to IPv4 NAT makes IPv4 preferable and IPv6 something to be avoided for people who have this particular use case.
      - usui 5y ago
        So if IPv6 NAT worked as well as IPv4 NAT/was not buggy, you would be fine switching in a hyoothetical IPv6 mandate?