No, CGNAT (Carrier-Grade NAT - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT) is an IPv4 only thing. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6598 specifies they should use 100.64.0.0/10 for it, to avoid conflicting with the pre-existing private-use ranges. IPv6 removes the need for using CGNAT, as each home router is allocated a public IP (rather than a CGNAT IP) on its public link.
Oh so cgnat exists for ipv4 addresses to talk to IPv6 servers? Is that what you are telling me?
Because all of the www is in IPv6, and cgnat actually excuses for ipv4 cable users to use the bedrock internet servers and services?
Bullshit. Cgnat is a hack for ipv6 to talk to the ipv4 universe.
Because if there were magically enough iov4 addresses for mobiles, would cgnat exist? No, it wouldn't.