Today in our newest take on “older technology is better”: why NAT rules!

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Hurricane Electric gives me a /48.

    Site-local ipv6 would work here as well, true. But then my containers wouldnt have internet access. Kubernetes containers use Ipam with a single subnet, they can’t use SLAAC.

    • Thiakil@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Point is, you should be able to have them have both. Or stick a reverse proxy in front that can translate. Unless they’re somehow meant to be directly internet reachable the public addresses could be autogenerated

      Full disclosure though I don’t know anything about kubernetes.

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, I wonder if there’s any proposals to allow for multiple IPV6 addresses in Kubernetes, it would be a much better solution than NAT.

        As far as I know, it’s currently not possible. Every container/Pod receives a single IPv4 and/or IPv6 address on creation from the networking driver.