NAT-PT?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

Hi guys,

Next week at the IETF meeting there will be some discussions about how  
to go forward with NAT-PT.

The idea behind NAT-PT (RFC 2766) is to allow an IPv6-only host to  
access IPv4-only stuff through a translator, but in RFC 4966 the IETF  
deprecated this mechanism because of a number of problems. Now we're  
trying to see if these problems can be solved so the main benefit of  
NAT-PT can be retained.

What are your views? Is some form of NAT-PT useful? Any interest in  
running a mostly IPv6-only network where customers access the IPv4  
world through translators?

Or should we just stack NAT upon NAT when we run out of IPv4  
addresses, so hosts would be dual stack IPv6/IPv4+NAT+NAT (one NAT  
locally like now, one in the ISP network). And would ISPs then roll  
out IPv6 or focus on making the double NAT work, so that we could end  
up with no IPv6 but just IPv4 with multiple layers of NAT?

See the v6ops agenda for thursday:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/v6ops/agenda?item=agenda70.html

Also, CAIDA is trying to collect some IPv6 traceroute data and needs  
our help:
http://www.caida.org/data/how-to/scamper/ipv6-collection-2007/

Iljitsch