Let's Focus on Moving Forward Re: V6 still not supported

Masataka Ohta mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp
Sun Mar 27 00:30:54 UTC 2022

Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:

> It still looks like NAT to me.

Almost all the people, perhaps other than you, accept NAT
as is to keep IPv4 Internet or as part of transition
plan from IPv4 to IPv6.

> NAT is a disgusting hack and destroys the universal peer to peer
> nature of the internet in favor of a consumer/provider model.

As I repeatedly pointed out, end to end NAT is clean preserving
the universal peer to peer nature of the Internet.


The basic idea is to let NAT boxes perform address translations
only without adjusting check sums or translating ports and
to let end systems perform reverse address translations,
which restores correct check sums, and port number

						Masataka Ohta

More information about the NANOG mailing list