REPLY: 2:5001/100.1 60db8cbd   
   MSGID: 2:5005/49 60dca972   
   CHRS: CP866 2   
   TZUTC: 0700   
   TID: hpt/fbsd 1.9.0-cur 2019-12-05   
   Dear Dmitry,   
      
   30 Jun 21 00:09, you wrote to me:   
      
      
    DP>>> NPTv6 is the answer (RFC 6296).   
      
    VS>> It's not a good answer. One of the key priorities of IPv6 as   
    VS>> touted by its proponents is the end-to-end connectivity, freedom   
    VS>> from NAT.   
      
    DP> NAT66 is what NAT for ipv6 is called.   
      
   What was the incentive to create such an abomination?   
      
    DP> NPTv6 is not a NAT, it's   
    DP> stateless solution.   
      
   Even if NPT is called "prefix translation" and is stateless, it is still a NAT   
   (in IPv4 terms, a type of a one-to-one NAT).   
      
   However, the creators of IPv6 had better invent something like "dead gateway   
   detection" or some other way for end devices to select a working outgoing   
   address when they have several global prefixes (and gateways) available. I   
   thought my knowledge was lacking, but it turns out the new and flashy protocol   
   stack is lacking.   
      
   Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN   
   --- GoldED+/BSD 1.1.5-b20170303-b20170303   
    * Origin: Ulthar (2:5005/49)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 50/109 90/1 105/81 120/340 123/131 124/5016 154/10   
   SEEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 6 360 226/30 227/702 229/424 426 550 700 1016   
   SEEN-BY: 230/0 240/1120 5138 5411 5824 5832 5853 249/206 317 400 280/464   
   SEEN-BY: 280/5003 5006 5555 282/1038 292/854 8125 301/1 310/31 317/3   
   SEEN-BY: 320/219 322/757 335/364 342/200 423/81 120 460/58 463/68   
   SEEN-BY: 467/239 888 633/280 712/848 770/1 2452/250 2454/119 4500/1   
   SEEN-BY: 5000/111 5001/100 5005/49 53 5015/46 5020/545 715 830 846   
   SEEN-BY: 5020/1042 2047 2140 4441 5053/54 5058/104 5064/56 5083/1   
   SEEN-BY: 5083/444   
   PATH: 5005/49 5020/1042 221/6 1 280/464 240/5832 229/426