NAT traversal is so cursed oh my god

@SuricrasiaOnline@cybre.space every time I remember that we're years and years from full IPv6 deployment I become sad

@alexandra not totally convinced they won't do "NAT for IPv6"

@SuricrasiaOnline@cybre.space for what possible reason

@alexandra idk, I'm curious how address allocation is done. does an ISP purchase a block to allocate themselves?

@SuricrasiaOnline@cybre.space ISPs request IPv6 addresses from their local, national, or regional Internet registries, who have preposterously large blocks to give so they'll just hand them out for free. The sheer number of IPv6 addresses means there's no need to be stingy with them.

IANA's explanation

2^128 is a very VERY big number.

@alexandra oh ok thank goodness

@SuricrasiaOnline@cybre.space yeah when they were designing IPv6 they said "we are never doing this address space running out NAT garbage again, we'll spend like 32 bytes for every single packet to make sure of it" and it was a good trade.

@alexandra really hoping this means people could just host web servers on their home machines without fussing around with configuration

@SuricrasiaOnline@cybre.space if the ISPs aren't stupid about it that should be 100% possible