[189482] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Public DNS64
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ca By)
Mon May 30 19:44:10 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7APWcHOFSdUAe3m8BzpwnkoFB6sPX1gJV7jRhLO97+T-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 16:44:05 -0700
From: Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Monday, May 30, 2016, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Like HE is doing?
> >
> > swmike@uplift:~$ dig +short AAAA ipv4.swm.pp.se @nat64.he.net
> > 2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f
> > swmike@uplift:~$ ping6 2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f
> > PING 2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f(2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f) 56 data
> bytes
> > 64 bytes from 2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f: icmp_seq=1 ttl=42 time=316 ms
> > 64 bytes from 2001:470:64:ffff::d4f7:c88f: icmp_seq=2 ttl=42 time=315 ms
> >
> > Now, pinging myself via DNS64/NAT64 service and getting 315ms RTT means
> > the NAT64 isn't very local to me... :P
>
>
>
> It goes to the USA and back again. They would need NAT64 servers in every
> region and then let the DNS64 service decide which one is close to you by
> encoding the region information in the returned IPv6 address. Such as
> 2001:470:64:[region number]::/96.
>
> An anycast solution would need a distributed NAT64 implementation, such
> that the NAT64 servers could somehow synchronize state. A more simple
> solution is just to have the DNS64 be anycast and have a DNS64 at each
> NAT64 location with the DNS64 returning pointers to the local NAT64.
>
> Now, can we have a public MAP server? That might scale. The geo blockers
> will hate it. What is not to like?
>
>
MAP scale. I know folks think it is theoretically nice but....
Just curious, has anyone yet deployed MAP at scale? I know of several
production and large scale nat64s (usually mobile 464xlat related), and a
few large ds-lite, but never MAP in production at scale. Maybe i am
missing something.
CB
Regards,
>
> Baldur
>
