routerOS v7 (2021) supports IPv6 NAT66/NPT
A quick search also shows that Vyatta supports NAT66/NPT
edgeOS, well its Ubiquiti, what do you expect when trying to use trash?


----------------------------------
Brandon Jackson
[email protected]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 11:29 AM Matthew Petach via NANOG
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2026, 00:32 Marco Moock via NANOG <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Am 17.06.26 um 08:29 schrieb Vasilenko Eduard via NANOG:
> > > Has any CPE vendor implemented the redundancy NPTv6 scheme (with all
> > IPv6 features) that Matthew mentioned for NAT44?
> >
> > No, as normal CPE devices are used by home users. They don't need that.
> > Business users buy professional devices and use BGP or other routing
> > protocols for real redundancy.
> >
>
>
> *facepalm*
>
> No, my small business with 15 people doesn't buy Juniper routers with two
> BGP upstreams and pay ARIN for an ASN and provider independent IP space.
>
> But it *does* still want to be able to get work done on the Internet when
> ISP A goes down by using ISP B.
>
> You seem to be denying the existence of all the small businesses in the
> world.
> Given that Google estimates there are 200 to 400 million enterprises with
> less than 50 employees worldwide,  that's a pretty big chunk of the
> business world to ignore.
>
> Or are you suggesting that 400 million small businesses should get their
> own ASNs and provider independent IPv6 space, and use BGP to gain
> redundancy for their businesses?
>
> (talk about driving a demand for more router RAM for the DFZ core!   ;-P )
>
>
> > > Reminder: 6man WG makes all possible efforts to block NPTv6.
> >
> > It already exists, IIRC Cisco IOS supports that.
> >
>
>
> Too bad every small business using edgeOS or Vyatta or routerOS is left
> out--no NPTv6 or NAT66 for them.  But that was some pretty good shilling
> for Cisco there.  ;)
>
> In all seriousness, I hope we're coming to the realization that there's a
> big use case that is not currently well supported on the V6 world, and
> telling hundreds of millions of small businesses to add to the BGP-speaking
> core routing tables is probably *not* the right answer.  Unless of course
> you want Geoff Huston to do a NANOG talk entitled "What The Hell Just
> Happened?" with a hockey-stick shaped graph showing the number of ASNs in
> the v6 routing tables.  :/
>
> In summary: there are still technical hurdles to deploying IPv6 that we
> created through our decisions long ago that need to be solved before we can
> start talking about sunsetting IPv4.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> > --
> > Gruß
> > Marco
> > Muell und Spam bitte an [email protected]
> > _______________________________________________
> > NANOG mailing list
> >
> > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/64HPVUSE2EXJH664UAY3T4YJX2G3VQET/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/TXYK36SDIONPF72NKIEY6XHR7DDCBD7G/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/CKUBVOP46YDAYPT4SOWY7BSJ2QCF2MZW/

Reply via email to