http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18176841 en Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:37:26 EDT Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:37:26 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18188737 justbits : NAT is not required for IPv6. Absolutely every device in existence can have a unique IPv6 address. To make customers feel like there is an added value to a particular IPv6 network router, router software might provide something like NAT in an IPv6 world to maybe anonymize Internet access or make local network management easier in some way. But, there is no definite need or requirement to implement the equivalent of NAT in IPv6. IPv6 solves the problems that NAT in IPv4 solves. But still, NAT in IPv6 would probably not really be NAT, since it could be implemented by defining a bunch of static routes. Setting up a bunch of static routes dynamically in IPv6 kinda defeats the purpose of IPv6's dynamic router advertisment and dynamic address assignment abilities. In fact, someone implementing port mapping or IPv6 address mapping, IPv4 NAT kind of things, would probably introduce incompatibilities for IPv6 software that is not expecting any port mapping or address mapping to take place in an IPv6 world.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18188737 Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:56:23 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18176841 anon : Is there any truth to: When everybody will be using IPv6, we will not be using NAT?

- Thanks -]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,18176841 Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:31:51 EDT