Re: IPv4 flag day

[Pedro Prado via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

Makes me remember when I could open windows’ settings and use NetBEUI,
NetBios with IPX, with IP… it was actually great: Windows networking would
work with any of these. After all they are simply underlying layers. (Space
for comments about my heresy praising windows networking: [         ])

IMHO the solution is thereabouts: the protocol shouldn’t matter. Can’t use
NAT with IPv6? We shouldn’t care in the upper layers. To me it seems
there’s enough effort in making ipv4 or ipv6 good protocols… but not so
much on the uppers.


*Pedro Martins Prado*
pedro.prado () gmail com / +353 83 036 1875 (FaceTime & WhatsApp)

On Thu 18 Jun 2026 at 10:06, William Herrin via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 10:39 AM Douglas Fischer via NANOG
> <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
> > NAT is cancer!
> > NAT in IPv6 is spreading cancer cells to all the organs of a new, healthy
> > body.
>
> Hi Douglas,
>
> Hate on it all you want, 1:many NAT renders my internal network not
> just inaccessible from the Internet but inaddressible as well. That's
> a feature not a bug. It's a feature I want for some of my subnets.
> When I get around to deploying IPv6 on those subnets it's a feature I
> will use. You don't have to like it. It's not your network.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
> --
> For hire. https://bill.herrin.us/resume/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/VXIEFJOVPKMBMKJIBJY6TKRJSHNMQYB5/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/T6OTUWNYCUMC5YCKOATW4QGOXQ722YSA/