[144255] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT444 or ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Arturo Servin)
Tue Sep 6 20:36:32 2011
From: Arturo Servin <arturo.servin@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1314902197.33694.YahooMailNeo@web121420.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 21:35:45 -0300
To: Serge Vautour <sergevautour@yahoo.ca>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
NAT444 alone is not enough.
You will need to deploy it along with 6rd or DS-lite.
Whilst you still have global v4, use it. The best is to deploy =
dual-stack, but that won't last for too long.
Regards,
as-
On 1 Sep 2011, at 15:36, Serge Vautour wrote:
> Hello,
>=20
> Things I understand: IPv6 is the long term solution to IPv4 =
exhaustion. For IPv6 to work correctly, most of the IPv4 content has to =
be on IPv6. That's not there yet. IPv6 deployment to end users is not =
trivial (end user support, CPE support, etc...). Translation techniques =
are generally evil. IPv6->IPv4 still requires 1 IPv4 IP per end user or =
else you're doing NAT. IPv4->IPv6 (1-1) doesn't solve our main problem =
of giving users access to the IPv4 Internet.
>=20
>=20
> I expect like most companies we're faced with having to extend the =
life of IPv4 since our users will continue to want access to the IPv4 =
content. Doing that by giving them an IPv6 address is not very feasible =
yet for many reasons. NAT444 seems like the only solution available =
while we slowly transition over to IPv6 over the next 20 years. Based on =
the this RFC, NAT444 breaks a lot of applications!
>=20
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-nat444-impacts-01
>=20
> Has anyone deployed NAT444? Can folks share their experiences? Does it =
really break this many apps? What other options do we have?=20
>=20
>=20
> Thanks,
> Serge
