I finally found a reason to use IPv6 NAT/masquerading and this feels so wrong. Trying to route my home net into a walled garden /64 subnet.
-
Maybe using router advertisements for my main network and sub-/64 allocation via DHCPv6 for the walled garden, but that's even messier.
I want my end hosts to not have to change. They get a simple single routable v6 address and can just transparently NAT to the walled garden.
-
-
OK, I misunderstood at the first reading... So here NAT is used for home subnet to access the walled garden, not the other way around
-
NAT is probably a fair compromise here, to avoid extra complex configuration, and not too wrong at the same time.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.