Comment by Dylan16807
4 days ago
Half your complaints don't make sense, but most importantly if you think NAT isn't a problem and is under your control you must have never experienced the growing plague of CGNAT.
4 days ago
Half your complaints don't make sense, but most importantly if you think NAT isn't a problem and is under your control you must have never experienced the growing plague of CGNAT.
If the NAT function is running on a box that I can walk over and kick, then it is absolutely under my control. :)
CGNAT is a different discussion entirely. Neither the presence nor absence of upstream CGNAT changes my thoughts on locally-administrated NAT for my own LAN in IPv6 land.
When people complain about NAT they're mostly worried about NAT they don't control. CGNAT, or trying to deliver something that works on normal consumer computers without an expert user.
That's one perspective.
From my own perspective: I've been hearing people complain about local one-to-many NAT for a very long time, starting 30 or so years ago when fairly-regular people started introducing internet connections to their small networks.
These days, I hear about IPv6 being awesome mostly because it can used to eliminate the need for one-to-many NAT at the local border.
And that sounds great, in concept, except: This elimination introduces new issues that people didn't experience in their previous world of local NAT.
---
CGNAT is its own thing that was broadly introduced relatively recently. It can be similar in operation, but is generally very dissimilar in terms of scale and our ability to control its operation as end-users.
And people know it's different. We even use a different term to disambiguate it from other, more-local, types of NAT that are popularly implemented at the border between their LAN and the Internet: We call one of these things "NAT," and the other of these things "CGNAT".
---
And to be very clear: If I've ever meant to write about CGNAT, then I'd have done so -- and it would be obvious.
I'm very reluctant to defend a position that I have not presented, as entertaining such strawman arguments brings me to feel the opposite of satisfaction.
I'm richly disinterested in such discourse.
2 replies →