IPv6 NAT (NAT66) - Implementations?

[Roger Jørgensen]

On søn, april 17, 2011 21:34, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm wondering what implementations of IPv6-to-IPv6-NAT are out there,
> and what variant of NAT66 they implement - as in "NPT66 prefix
> translation"
> or "IPv4-style N->1 address-and-port translation".
>
> I have been told that Juniper ScreenOS does "IPv4 style NAPT", and of
> course a number of load balancers do destination NAT towards the
> corresponding HTTP servers.  But that's just a fraction of the IPv6
> capable products on the market...
>
> In case you wonder: I'm not saying NAT is good or NAT is bad - I'm
> preparing
> a talk that is supposed to give a balanced view on the pros and cons, and
> part of that talk is a market overview "what has been implemented today?".
>
> If there's interest, I'll send a summary to the list (when I receive
> enough suitable material to make this useful).
>
> thanks in advance,

I will likely run into some demand for NAT feature for IPv6 in a few
months and some more background information will for sure help, so
please send it to the list:)

(the demand for NAT is not technical based and quite low chance of
succes in convincing them that it's not needed but I'll try anyway....)



-- 
---


------------------------------
Roger Jorgensen      | - ROJO9-RIPE  - RJ85P-NORID
roger at jorgensen.no           | - The Future is IPv6
-------------------------------------------------------

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?