Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)

Mon Oct 1 13:25:26 UTC 2007

On 9/30/07 2:59 PM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch at muada.com> wrote:
> 
> So what I say is:
> 
> <v4 world> - <NAT> - <tunnel over v6> - <process NATed v4>
> 
> And what you say is:
> 
> <v4 world> - <NAT> - <translate to v6> - <forward over native v6> -
> <translate to v4> - <process NATed v4>
> 
> Your model has more steps, and it's also more complicated. If you
> know you're going to go back to v4 anyway, it makes more sense to
> keep the IPv4 header around and tunnel rather than translate. This
> doesn't affect the IPv6 processing, because all IPv6 header fields
> can be the same regardless.
> 

====> Iljitsch,

I¹m afraid you characterization is oversimplified. Would you like to have an
off-line conversation
(phone or maybe at the next NANOG) to go over the details?

   - Alain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20071001/a2799ecb/attachment.html>