On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 at 09:36, Arie Vayner <ariev@vayner.net> wrote:
So my take on "If you want to do NAPT with your IPv6, go right ahead", in the current state, is that it's not practical, and has become a real blocker for IPv6 ubiquity.
Disagree, exists in real commercial and open source implementations today and has for decades. I agree that the IPv6 kook messaging is hurting, making it seem like you shouldn't be doing NAT. But these are non-technical problems, and won't stop anyone using IPv6 NAPT in their edge.
To move IPv6 to the next level of SMB/enterprise adoption we need to make it easier to consume by the average SMB - which means stop saying "NAT is evil" or "NAT is not supported in IPv6", and unblock relevant IETF work.
Agree. Messaging needs work. Messaging needs to be 'you can do things exactly as you are doing today, you'll just have more addresses you can opt to use or not use'. This is perhaps the most difficult part here, to stop reaching for stars, because we can't even define what the stars are, different people want a different future for IP. Decouple these desires, deliver more IP now, and continue other pursuits in other avenues without asking for them to be lockstep. -- ++ytti