Hacker News Reader

It's not so much that the advantages of IPv6 are all that compelling. Rather, it's more that the mechanisms put in place to deal with a nearly-exhausted IPv4 pool (NAT, and CGNAT in particular, etc.) are not great, and any opportunity to negate the need for them ought to be pursued.

View on HN

But you still need these mechanisms for the time being. And personally, I do like NAT. I'm not a fan of exposing my internal networks to the internet. Having everything hidden behind a single address is neat.

As has been discussed ad nauseam, getting rid of NAT does not mean all your hosts are exposed. You would still have a firewall, and managing that firewall is much more straightforward when one doesn’t have to deal with address or port translations.

But my internal network structure will still be exposed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com