undefined | Better HN

0 pointscyrnel2y ago0 comments

If you have an agent installed on every node that can already traverse NAT, you don't have to care about what your ISP supports.

There are many more IPv6-centric solutions to their problem. Sounds like they didn't even try to think of alternatives and instead reached straight for NAT. That wasn't necessary, at least from the amount of information we can glean from this one post.

0 comments

apenwarr2y ago

(Tailscale cofounder here) Tailscale already gives every node on every tailnet a globally unique internal IPv6 address, that is reachable even if you don't have IPv6 on the "outside" network. If your apps and OSes are all willing to use IPv6, you haven't had a problem since the early days of Tailscale; they've been solved for years.

Alas, the "apps and OSes are all willing to use IPv6" problem is a persistent one, so we have to make IPv4 work too.

bradfitz2y ago

We considered so many alternatives actually.

ksjskskskkk2y ago

are those discarded documented somewhere so we don't walk in circles?

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse