The best thing about SLAAC is that it forces your ISP to give you at least 64 bits. Otherwise you know Comcast would only give out a /128 and charge you for more, so you'd use NAT at home just like IPv4.
Unfortunately SLAAC doesn't force upstream to provide a /64 universally.
Some ISPs are reportedly giving out a /128, and SLAAC works adequately with a router performing IPv6 NAT, so those ISPs don't see a problem.
Mobile phone as WiFi access point is another common way people access the net nowadays. I've occasionally seen permanent installations, with a phone taped to a window. I've never seen a mobile phone AP offer IPv6 to clients, but if they do they have to use SLAAC-compatible IPv6 NAT in that situation.
> Some ISPs are reportedly giving out a /128, and SLAAC works adequately with a router performing IPv6 NAT, so those ISPs don't see a problem.
Wow, that’s diabolical. Presumably these routers are some custom CPEs then? I don’t even know whether regular home routers support NAT66.
> I've never seen a mobile phone AP offer IPv6 to clients
I’ve only even seen it work without NAT when there was any v6! Usually the phone gets a /64, and there is a bit of trickery involved to make that shareable to other devices (NDP rewriting), but it works pretty well.
> I've never seen a mobile phone AP offer IPv6 to clients, but if they do they have to use SLAAC-compatible IPv6 NAT in that situation.
iPhone does that, and I’m pretty sure I’ve seen Android doing the same. The phone keeps a single /128 from the /64 assigned by the mobile network on its mobile interface and the re-assigns the /64 on the WiFi interface. No NAT is involved.
