The misinformation is being spread on purpose. The more people adopt solar and their own batteries the less they rely on the power companies and the less money the power companies can make
- 帖子
- 4
- 评论
- 403
- 加入于
- 3 yr. ago
- 帖子
- 4
- 评论
- 403
- 加入于
- 3 yr. ago
It just creates unnecessary complication. It's not particularly memorable, it's a pain to even just lookup tye syntax imo compared with v4, and I genuinely do not see the benefit at the home level to getting rid of NAT. Carrier and backhaul? Oh yeah nat is a fucking plague. But home level? Literally causes no issues it's trivial to work with, 98% of people do not need ports forwarded ever. Those that do it's not hard. IPV6 necessitates more careful control of a firewall now that every device is globally reachable and means that it won't even make opening a service any easier. It's just firewall instead of NAT forward which on most routers will more or less be the same process
6to4 exists and could handle translation of the backhaul 6 to a local 4. Only the router itself need be directly addressable imo.