4 ms·
NAT accelerated hardware exists almost everywhere now. But yes NAT is a pita overall. CGNAT is even more of a problem.
by compounding_it 9mo ago
NAT accelerated hardware exists almost everywhere now. But yes NAT is a pita overall. CGNAT is even more of a problem.
- djha-skin 9mo agoNot really, this is only true for mobile devices.
- compounding_it 9mo ago7621 devices include hardware NAT. And anything Qualcomm in the recent past does. Most home WiFi 5 and above routers can do hardware NAT just fine. Hardware NAT allows for using cheap and old cpus for CPE. ISP hardware is a different story. Some decent routers that can do that which don’t cost a lot. https://www.reddit.com/r/openwrt/comments/1lopamn/current_highest_spec_router_that_supports_openwrt/ https://www.reddit.com/r/openwrt/comments/1lopamn/current_hi...
- benjiro 9mo ago> Not really, this is only true for mobile devices. Tell that to my fixed line provider, with their CGNAT ... And its just about every provider in Germany pulling that crap. O, and dynamic IPv6 pre-fix also, because can't have you run any servers! Yes, plenty of ways to bypass it but when you have ISP's still stuck in 1990's attitude, with dynamic IPv4/IPv6, limited upload (1/3 to 1/5 of your download), etc ...
- est31 9mo agoI was mostly thinking about CGNAT instead of NAT around your home network. There is a talk by Dmitriy Melnik at RIPE 91 about the costs for ISPs to not adopt ipv6 vs to adopt ipv6 (relevant stuff starts at 9:55). https://ripe91.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/sessions/37/8YZNF9/ https://ripe91.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/sessions/37/8...