[111983] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Confusion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Ward)
Tue Feb 17 22:07:25 2009
From: Nathan Ward <nanog@daork.net>
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <m2r61wzdna.wl%randy@psg.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:07:06 +1300
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 18/02/2009, at 3:23 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> I find it a shame that NAT-PT has become depreciated
>
> the ietf has recanted and is hurriedly trying to get this back on
> track. of course, to save face, the name has to be changed.
Sort of - except it is only for IPv6 "clients" to connect to named
IPv4 "servers". NAT-PT allowed for the opposite direction, IPv4
"clients" connecting to IPv6 "servers" - NAT64 does not.
The server must have an A record in DNS, and the client must use that
name to connect to - just like NAT-PT.
--
Nathan Ward
