Absence of NAT seems like a feature to me. Only if IETF would fix multi-hop multi-prefix solution for the business site. Home Networking WG did fail. SHIM6 failed too. Till that time, NAT is the only solution for business. Wed/ -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Kirch via NANOG <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 5, 2025 17:50 To: North American Network Operators Group <nanog@lists.nanog.org> Cc: Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> Subject: Re: Artificial Juniper SRX limitations preventing IPv6 deployment (and sales)
On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 6:00 AM Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Hi Tim, Multi-prefix, SP address delegation through the site, absence of NAT.
Absence of NAT seems like a feature to me. Fixing things to work with NAT has been, and continues to be incredibly expensive. NAT provides little to no value in IPv6 because it is not scarcity driven. Eliminating NAT is a net-benefit of IPv6. Andrew _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/VN6EHSOE...