NAT64 and matching identities

Andrew Sullivan asullivan at
Tue Nov 19 16:36:50 UTC 2013

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 03:06:52PM -0500, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
> Other IPv6 transition mechanisms appear to be no less thorny than
> NAT64 for a variety of reasons.

Some of us who worked on the NAT64/DNS64 combination were content that
it was a long way from the perfect solution.  The idea I at least had
was to get something that mostly worked most of the time, and was
simple enough that anyone could basically understand it.
Nevertheless, I have to admit that it's a pig.

That piggishness was not something I wanted to get rid of.  I thought
(and still think) that if the transition mechanisms are awful enough,
it will encourage moving things to v6 for real so that we can get rid
of the kludges.  Perhaps this is wishful thinking, however.  

In any case, I'm sorry to have contributed in some little way to this
headache of yours.



Andrew Sullivan
Dyn, Inc.
asullivan at
v: +1 603 663 0448

More information about the NANOG mailing list