Hacker News Reader

Would it be ethical/useful to overwhelm NATs with addr:port combinations to overflow the NAT's translation table? If NATs start breaking down, it might force upstream to start adopting IPv6. I could see a system of doing this as setting a different port for each outgoing connection. Thoughts?

View on HN

I doubt it would be either ethical or useful to deliberately overload translation tables. That said, I would imagine that the migration to QUIC and HTTP/3 would increase pressure on NATs. QUIC's use of UDP means that it's harder to safely reuse source ports for connections to different destinations compared to TCP, so the density of connections per external IP address should be lower.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com