Yes. NAT is dead. There have been some attempts to ratify standards for NAT over IPv6 but none of them ever got off the ground.
This has actually caused issues for providers who are attempting to meet PCI-DSS standards, as the standard actually states that you must be behind a NAT.
For me, this is some of the most wonderful news I've ever heard. I hate NAT, and I hate carrier-grade NAT even more.
NAT was only ever meant to be a bandaidband-aid solution to get us through till IPv6 became standard, but it became ingrained into the internet society.
For the transition period, you have to remember that IPv4 and IPv6 are, apart from a similar name, are totally different 1. So for devices that are Dual-Stack,: your IPv4 will be NATted and your IPv6 will not. It's almost like having two totally seperateseparate devices, just packaged into the one piece of plastic.
So, how does IPv6 internet access work? Well, the way the internet used to work before NAT was invented. Your ISP will assign you an IP range (same as they do now, but they generally assign you a /32, which means that you only get one IP address), but your range will now have millions of available IP addresses in it. You are free to populate these IP addresses as you chosechoose (with auto-configuration or DHCPv6). Each one of these IP addresses will be visible from any other computer on the internet.
Sounds scary, right? Your domain controller, home media PC and your iPhone with your hidden stash of pornography are all going to be accessableaccessible from the internet?! Well, no. That's what a firewall is for. Another great feature of IPv6 is that it forces firewalls from an "Allow All" approach (as most home devices are) into a "Deny All" approach, where you open up services for particular IP addresses. 99.999% of home users will happily keep their firewalls default and totally locked down, which means that no un-solicited traffficunsolicited traffic will be allowed in.
1Ok there's way more to it than that, but they are in no way compatible with each other, even though they both permit the same protocols running on top