Post #2898267
2026-03-25 13:11 UTC
@mWare@ottawa.place
@miyuru@ipv6.social
Thank you for sharing this information. This is the same I hear from small ISP in DE also. Which I fully understand, as the average customer plugs in the CPE and is happy that it works. But cannot attribute issues in their daily usage with e.g, NAT444.
In Europe you need to rent or buy legacy addresses which eats heavily into the profit margins of any ISP.
And than they also need to buy expensive CGNAT boxes. You might be in a lucky position to have enough legacy addresses.
Replies (1)
-
@mWare@ottawa.place 2026-03-25 13:42
@goetz@ipv6.social @miyuru@ipv6.social both are the case; I have a good amount of legacy (/22 and a /21) and a small customer base, but FreeBSD with pf(4) performs fantastically. Linux’s NAT performance falls off a cliff once the state table falls out of the L1/L2 cache. Either way, I’ve got to work on v6 some more; we run a ton of Ubiquiti for CPE, which still is middling for v6 support.