[135277] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT-PT or NAT64 in real life
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikhail Strizhov)
Wed Jan 19 12:24:27 2011
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:24:22 -0700
From: Mikhail Strizhov <strizhov@netsec.colostate.edu>
To: jarod smith <jarod.smouth@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik1twjfBnhcyLYvx+RBHs63hi2siCE6R9SLMgfv@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi,
I didn't use NAT-PT, but have lot of experience with NAT64/DNS64.
We've deployed NAT64 with DNS64 in our test lab with last Fedora linux
workstations , so far, it works fine.
--
Sincerely,
Mikhail Strizhov
Email: strizhov@netsec.colostate.edu <mailto:strizhov@netsec.colostate.edu>
On 01/19/2011 02:18 AM, jarod smith wrote:
> Although it would seem that double-stack is still the preferred method of linux
> distribution, I want my next deployed in IPv6 only.
> For linux there is NAT-PT tomicki and NAT64 Viagenie.
>
> I don't have Cisco equipment although I'd like tested their NAT-PT, even if
> it's obsolete.
>
> Are some of you have installed one of these two implementations in
> production on recent versions of linux? Is it stable, secure, ... ?
>
>
> Regards
