Comment by yjftsjthsd-h 10 months ago
Depends on your users; there are, for instance, plenty of phones that only natively have v6 and have to use NAT64 to reach v4 websites. So if you have such users, there might be a benefit to supporting v6 directly.
The NAT64 server for those users is in the same place the CGNAT used to be.
There are already cases of Internet connectivity issues due to overloaded CGNAT. I know for a while I could only visit IPv6 websites, IPv4 technically works but the amount of packet drops meant that my IPv4 internet speed was only about 15KB/s!
It's the whole reason why I discovered a DNS server that synthesizes AAAA records, for websites that actually support IPv6 through their CDN. [0]
> As you said though, those users can reach v4 websites.
Therefore, the question is: Can those users really reach IPv4 websites?
Mind you, I don't expect the CGNAT-overloading issue to relieve over time -- unless we deploy IPv6 everywhere ;)
Its easier to get good latency and bandwidth over v6 than natted v4
What is the latency or bandwidth bottleneck in nat v4?
As you said though, those users can reach v4 websites.