Skip to content

Add Nexus and database support for IPv6 NAT #8758

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add Nexus and database support for IPv6 NAT #8758

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+674 −580

Conversation

bnaecker
Copy link
Collaborator

@bnaecker bnaecker commented Aug 4, 2025

@bnaecker bnaecker force-pushed the support-ipv6-nat-entries branch from 40d0fe2 to 34fa79f Compare August 4, 2025 20:16
@bnaecker bnaecker mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2025
Open
@bnaecker
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bnaecker commented Aug 4, 2025

Despite the pretty big diff, this is almost entirely non-functional changes. I've basically just renamed things from ipv4_nat_foo to nat_foo, and added support for IP addresses of either family. That includes the garbage-collector background task, database models, query methods, and the DB schema.

@bnaecker
Add Nexus and database support for IPv6 NAT
d368dab 
- Renames NAT tables in the database to be IP-family agnostic
- Renames NAT-enry-related types to be IP-family agnostic
- Adds a generic `IpNet` database model type
- Adds handling of IPv6 addresses for NAT entries, for both services and
  instances
- Fixes #5090. Fixes #8749.
@bnaecker bnaecker force-pushed the support-ipv6-nat-entries branch from 34fa79f to d368dab Compare August 4, 2025 20:38
smklein
smklein reviewed Aug 15, 2025
View reviewed changes
rcgoodfellow
rcgoodfellow reviewed Aug 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rcgoodfellow rcgoodfellow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @bnaecker. I like the approach of making the existing machinery dual stack rather than creating parallel IPv6 machinery.

FelixMcFelix
FelixMcFelix approved these changes Aug 18, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@FelixMcFelix FelixMcFelix left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for doing this Ben. This looks good, I agree with Ry on how nice it is to keep this as a single dual-stack table.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@FelixMcFelix FelixMcFelix FelixMcFelix approved these changes

@internet-diglett internet-diglett Awaiting requested review from internet-diglett

@jgallagher jgallagher Awaiting requested review from jgallagher

@rcgoodfellow rcgoodfellow Awaiting requested review from rcgoodfellow

@smklein smklein Awaiting requested review from smklein

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Need to track IPv6 NAT entries Implement NAT for IPv6
4 participants
@bnaecker @rcgoodfellow @smklein @FelixMcFelix