[ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar

YES 

:-)

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: ipv6-wg [mailto:ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Gert Doering
Gesendet: Sonntag, 17. Mai 2015 19:28
An: Benedikt Stockebrand
Cc: ipv6-wg at ripe.net IPv6
Betreff: Re: [ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar

Hi,

On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 04:49:29PM +0000, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote:
> Yes, of course you are right that this is a complex issue, but there's 
> a widespread tendency to carry the old limitations of today's IPv4 to 
> IPv6 even if there's no real need to do so.  And Marc calling NAT64 a 
> working solution despite the fact that it breaks IPv6 the same way NAT 
> broke
> IPv4 really asks to be balanced by a similarly oversimplified 
> statement going the other way:-)

Actually, the whole point is that NAT64 does not touch IPv6, so it is not "breaking IPv6" - it ensures that IPv4 legacy is still reachable, even if you're inside an IPv6-only network.  

Which sounds quite positive to me, given the alternative is "run dual-stack everywhere, forever, because someone out there might still be IPv4-only"...

Carriers can't "just turn off IPv4" if users still connect to IPv4-only sites...  so what is worse, NAT44/CGN and dual-stack all the way to the client, or nice and shiny IPv6-only at the edges, and NAT64 for talking to the old Internet?

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279