Unfortunately my ISP doesn’t support IPv6 yet, both for the public internet and for my local network.
Comment on Is it feasible to run a TURN server behind NAT?
thelittleblackbird@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Ipv6, get an ipv6. There is not nat in ipv6
hackysphere@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
thelittleblackbird@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Seems like a very reasonable reason to switch to another isp well established in the 21st century
hackysphere@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
I live in a rural area, so my only options are dealing with a mobile hotspot for everything or getting satellite internet for more than double the price.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Have you asked? It might be worth sending a email at least.
hackysphere@lemmy.ca 2 days ago
They only seem to support it for business customers for now, not for consumer usage.
Aganim@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Have I got news for you. ☹️
thelittleblackbird@lemmy.world 2 days ago
What a lot of nonsense. Of course the technology exists and of course it can be done. But in reality is not done because it simply doesn’t bring any benefit.
And in addition a address translation is not nat ™ because the server can be hit from the outside.
Today in ipv4 we have likely 2 Nats, 1 after your router and the other by the carrier (cgnat) and ipv6 those are non existent
Aganim@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It was meant tongue-in-cheek, you seem to be taking it much more serious than I intended it to be. 🙂
Fully agree that there is absolutely no benefit to NAT66, it only causes enormous headaches. In sincerely hope nobody uses it these days, this poor bastard however did manage to find a VPS provider that used NAT66 back in 2018: blog.apnic.net/2018/02/02/nat66-good-bad-ugly/ 🤢
thelittleblackbird@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Fuck, there is a law in internet (which name I cannot recall) about the impossibility of distinguish an ironic message.
I felt in that trap completely!!
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Don’t NAT ipv6. It is bad in so many ways.