North American Network Operators Group

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

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

  • From: Church, Charles
  • Date: Wed Oct 03 19:56:16 2007

 It's seems we're always confusing NAT with PAT (or NAT overload, or
whatever else you want to call it).  One to one NAT rarely breaks stuff.
NAT-PT would need to follow that model, otherwise, yes, things will
break.  It seems like an IPv6-only ISP would need to operate the NAT-PT
boxes, and dedicate a block of v4 addresses the size of the expected
concurrent online users to the NAT-PT box.  Keep in mind that a v6 ISP
with 1 million customers won't need a million v4 addresses, for obvious
reasons.  It's going to be considerably less than if each customer got a
v4 address.  NAT-PT does seem like a viable short term solution.  I'm
not sure though how to get current v4-only content providers to
dual-stack their stuff.  Increased domain fees maybe for v4-only


-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Iljitsch van Beijnum

And then you'll see your active FTP sessions, SIP calls, RTSP  
sessions, etc fail.