4 ms·

All the people against NAT/PAT and hyping up v6 as a way to get rid of it.

by dec0dedab0de 3y ago

NavinF 3y ago
That's unrelated. Any firewall can block incoming connections without the massive performance penalty of NAT
- shrubble 3y ago
  What performance penalty does NAT entail? Even low end home routers have built-in NAT on the chip, no cpu is used for NATting.
  - garaetjjte 3y ago
    Virtually all SOHO routers do routing on CPU.
    - nwallin 3y ago
      If you're going to do SOHO routing safely/correctly, you'll need to do some sort of connection tracking. You'll need to allow packets on new and existing outbound connections, but only allow incoming packets on existing connections. SOHO routers generally won't support this in hardware, so you have to route on the CPU anyway. NAT on IPv4 vs stateful routing on IPv6 is a wash in terms of performance.
  - NavinF 3y ago
    > low end home routers have built-in NAT on the chip Low end home routers have tiny connection tracking tables and fall back to software routing when that table overflows. IMO if you don't notice the massive drop in performance when this happens, you have very low standards/expectations for internet latency. In had to upgrade to a prosumer router just to get acceptable perf on IPv4
  - A1kmm 3y ago
    I'm thinking maybe they meant performance impact on peer-to-peer protocols like WebRTC, where if both sides are behind NAT, you might end up routing traffic between two local devices with a NAT gateway between them through a remote TURN server to establish connectivity.
- backendanon 3y ago
  There's no performance penalty for NAT that I'm aware of, I'd like to hear more about this. IPv6 OTOH has enough privacy busting concerns that I personally will never use it on my home systems. Trying to use only IPv4 on a smart phone though causes various connectivity issues, I've tried it. Google does own Android and wants to make sure they know as much about what we do on our phones as possible.
starfallg 3y ago
NAT is and always was a massive band-aid for the lack of public IPv4 addressing.

All the people against NAT/PAT and hyping up v6 as a way to get rid of it.

NavinF 3y ago

That's unrelated. Any firewall can block incoming connections without the massive performance penalty of NAT

shrubble 3y ago
What performance penalty does NAT entail? Even low end home routers have built-in NAT on the chip, no cpu is used for NATting.
- garaetjjte 3y ago
  Virtually all SOHO routers do routing on CPU.
  - nwallin 3y ago
    If you're going to do SOHO routing safely/correctly, you'll need to do some sort of connection tracking. You'll need to allow packets on new and existing outbound connections, but only allow incoming packets on existing connections. SOHO routers generally won't support this in hardware, so you have to route on the CPU anyway. NAT on IPv4 vs stateful routing on IPv6 is a wash in terms of performance.
- NavinF 3y ago
  > low end home routers have built-in NAT on the chip Low end home routers have tiny connection tracking tables and fall back to software routing when that table overflows. IMO if you don't notice the massive drop in performance when this happens, you have very low standards/expectations for internet latency. In had to upgrade to a prosumer router just to get acceptable perf on IPv4
- A1kmm 3y ago
  I'm thinking maybe they meant performance impact on peer-to-peer protocols like WebRTC, where if both sides are behind NAT, you might end up routing traffic between two local devices with a NAT gateway between them through a remote TURN server to establish connectivity.
backendanon 3y ago
There's no performance penalty for NAT that I'm aware of, I'd like to hear more about this. IPv6 OTOH has enough privacy busting concerns that I personally will never use it on my home systems. Trying to use only IPv4 on a smart phone though causes various connectivity issues, I've tried it. Google does own Android and wants to make sure they know as much about what we do on our phones as possible.

starfallg 3y ago

NAT is and always was a massive band-aid for the lack of public IPv4 addressing.