I usually solve this problem by designing for NAT444 and dual-stack. This solves both problems and allows for users to migrate as they are able/need to. If you try and force the change, you will loose users.
> On Aug 25, 2020, at 3:15 PM, Brandon Martin <lists.na...@monmotha.net> wrote: > > On 8/25/20 3:38 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: >> This is very common in many countries and not related to IPv6, but because >> many operators have special configs or features in the CPEs they provide. > > I really, really hate to force users to use my network edge router (I provide > the ONT, though, and I provide an edge router that works and most users do > take it), but it can be tough to ensure users have something that supports > all the right modern features and can be configured via standard means. > > It would be nice if the consumer router industry could get its collective act > together and at least come up with some easy-ish to understand feature > support table that customers can match up with their service provider's list > of needs. The status quo of a list of devices that work right (which is of > course often staggeringly short if you're doing any of these modern > transition mechanisms) that needs constant updating and may not be easily > available is not ideal. > > Heck just having a real, complete list of supported features on the model > support page on their website would be an improvement... > -- > Brandon Martin
