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

[Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

> On Mar 29, 2022, at 17:51 , Masataka Ohta <mohta () necom830 hpcl titech ac jp> wrote:
>
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> > > As I repeatedly pointed out, end to end NAT is clean preserving
> > > the universal peer to peer nature of the Internet.
> > Nope… It really isn’t.
>
> Wrong.
>
> > The problem of audit trail opacity is still a major issue with any form
> > of stateful NAT.
>
> How poorly you understand NAT.
>
> As I wrote in my draft:
>
>   Depending on how port numbers are shared, there are static and
>   dynamic E2ENAT or combinations of them. With static E2ENAT, an end
>   host is assigned port numbers statically, which is necessary for a
>   server with a stable IP address and a port number.
>
> static E2ENAT is not, with your questionable terminology, stateful.
>
> It is even possible to construct legacy NAT which dynamically,
> thus statefully, assign ports only from some static range,
> which does not need state maintenance, for each private IP
> address.
>
>                                               Masataka Ohta

It still suffers from a certain amount of opacity across administrative domains.

Owen