5 ms·

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. We considered NAT64 as well and looked at some implementations including eBPF-based ones like Cilium. Glad to know that IPv

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. We considered NAT64 as well and looked at some implementations including eBPF-based ones like Cilium. Glad to know that IPv6-only is working well for you. "In a perfect world…" :)

eqvinox 2y ago
It is what it is :/ … I do periodically ask these questions to track how v4-vs-v6 things are developing, and they're moving, albeit at a snail's pace. (FTR, it works for us because our CI is relatively self-contained. And we have local git mirrors… f***ing github…)
- lowpro 2y ago
  At my company (Fortune 100), we've been selling a lot of our public v4 space to implement... RFC1918 space. We've re-IP'd over 50,000 systems so far to private space. We just implemented NAT for the first time ever. I was surprised to see how far behind some companies are.
  - eqvinox 2y ago
    Progress is coming from the weirdest corners… US DoD and NATO require IPv6 feature-parity to IPv4 nowadays, no full IPv6 = no bidding on tenders… (I would already have expected this to be quite effective in forcing IPv6, but tbh I'm still surprised just how effective.)