This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/

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

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Mark Tinka mark.tinka at seacom.mu
Sun May 17 22:38:55 CEST 2015


On 17/May/15 19:46, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>  
>
> Right. NAT64-DNS64, while not perfect, is to me the only viable
> solution to move from where we are now to IPv6 in a cost effective
> manner. Running dual-stack is not cost-effective, while ipv6-only
> could be.
>
> When we first talked about NAT64 a while ago, I hated it. But I became
> fast convinced that it is a very important tool to move to IPv6.

IMHO, NAT64/DNS64 is the only real solution out there - one that does
not require an entire re-design of the network once the last IPv4 bit
has been carried.

Mark.

Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar
Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Implications of NAT/NAT64 and similar

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ ipv6-wg Archives ]