IPv6 vs NAT

Comments debate the advantages of IPv6 in eliminating NAT due to IPv4 address exhaustion, ISP deployment challenges, and the persistence of IPv4 NAT solutions like CGNAT.

➡️ Stable 0.5x DevOps & Infrastructure
3,877
Comments
19
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#8958
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2008
6
2009
16
2010
62
2011
85
2012
43
2013
117
2014
164
2015
131
2016
180
2017
163
2018
196
2019
240
2020
228
2021
464
2022
399
2023
472
2024
441
2025
290
2026
184

Keywords

IT US AWS V6 CEO O2 ASIC NAT DNS NAT64 ipv6 ipv4 nat ipv4 addresses isp addresses isps address ip carrier

Sample Comments

vxNsr Apr 25, 2021 View on HN

Because ipv6 is hard and NAT works well enough.

BlueTemplar Sep 13, 2020 View on HN

Can't we move to IPv6 where there is no NAT ?

miyuru Feb 22, 2025 View on HN

Public IPv4 address exhausted and NAT happened.Even having IPv6 is not a proper solution because of laggy ISPs(currently reaching ~50%) and the even the ISPs who deploy, do not deploy it properly. (dynamic prefixes or inbound blocked IPv6)Add to the mix that lot of people does not understand IPv6, internet became more centralized and will keep doing so for the foreseeable future.

nektro May 30, 2023 View on HN

ipv6 would solve these issues because they remove the need for NATs

dcow Oct 28, 2021 View on HN

There isn't one until IPv6-only ISPs (or plans) pop up offering cheaper connectivity because you don't need an expensive v4 address. NAT sucks and everyone's job would be easier if they didn't have to deal with it, but the CEO likely doesn't care about that and probably just sees the "add IPv6 support" scope and cost estimate and NOPEs out.I love IPv6 btw. I just don't think you'll see anything meaningful happen until FAANG drop IPv4 support. Imagi

phicoh Jan 9, 2017 View on HN

Two things. First, it is nice if you don't have to allocate ports on a NAT box to make a test system available. These days you can't really count on all non-production systems having public IPv4 addresses anymore.Obviously that only works if all systems that need access have IPv6.However, the main killer app for IPv6 is your ISP running out of IPv4 addresses. Carrier grade NAT boxes are expensive and introduce all kinds of issues. Better to move as much traffic to IPv6 as possibl

wtallis Feb 5, 2015 View on HN

IPv6 exists and works, and if we're going to expect our ISPs to get with the times we should be prepared to do so ourselves. NAT for IPv4 is ultimately unavoidable and thus excusable, but that doesn't mean that they can't use it to make the transition to IPv6 rougher on people who still need IPv4.

jbverschoor Aug 13, 2022 View on HN

Well.. with ipv6, there’s no need to nat anymore

cchance Apr 26, 2024 View on HN

There’s tons of ipv6 only isps running dns64 and nat464 and other variations to limit ipv4 needs massively if at all

icebraining Apr 26, 2012 View on HN

I doubt that; it's not reasonable to be on IPv6 only. ISP-level NAT for IPv4 will probably exist for a long time.