[jandrese]

> For example, in IPv4 each host has one local net address, and the gateway uses NAT to let it speak with the Internet. Simple and clean.

This is a troll right? NAT is a lot of things, but "simple and clean" is definitely not one of them. It causes complications at every step of the process.

Pure IPv6 is so much cleaner.

I will say that DHCP6 is probably misnamed. It does not fill the same niche has IPv4 DHCP, and this causes a lot of confusion with people who are new to IPv6. It should probably be called DPDP (Dynamic Prefix Distribution Protocol) or something like that. It's for routers not hosts.

In theory you should be using anycast DNS to find local hostnames, but in practice the tooling around this is somewhat underbaked.

[cyberax]

> This is a troll right? NAT is a lot of things, but "simple and clean" is definitely not one of them. It causes complications at every step of the process.

I invite you to try this challenge: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47796992

This is something that can be done with consumer-grade routers in _minutes_ with zero configuration from endpoints apart from the usual WiFi password.

NAT is a _superior_ design in practice. It can be chained transparently, it moves all the stateful routing complexity to the border router, it enforces network isolation. And most importantly, IT ACTUALLY WORKS.