North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: NAT v6->v4 and v4->v6 (was Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 )

  • From: Alain Durand
  • Date: Mon Oct 01 08:39:28 2007

Title: Re: NAT v6->v4 and v4->v6 (was Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 )



On 9/29/07 8:24 PM, "Mark Smith" <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Alain,

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 08:45:58 -0400
"Durand, Alain" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> It is also becoming apparent that:
>
> - the "core internet" (ie the web and any infrastructure server) will take a long time to move to v6 and/or dual stack.
>
> - new v6-only edges will have to communicate with it. So we need v6->v4 translation in the core
>

MPLS as well as the IETF softwires techniques (the MPLS
model without using MPLS i.e. tunnel from ingress to egress via
automated setup tunnels - gre, l2tp, or native IPv4 or IPv6) can or
will shortly be able to be used to tunnel IPv6 over IPv4 or vice versa.
softwires in effect treats the non-native core infrastructure as an
NBMA layer 2.

-----> Mark,

I’m afraid my use of the word “core internet” has confused you and others.
I was not talking about core backbone, but about all the infrastructure that user
depend on, eg web servers, mail servers, streaming servers, p2p,....

Yes MPLS or Softwires will help you cross those core backbones, but won’t do much to
help content providers to upgrade to v6... The problems are very different there.
I know we are network engineers and as such tend to see every problems as network layer.
However, this is not a layer 3 issue but a layer 7 & 8:
getting the applications ported to v6 and paying for the upgrade.


    - Alain.