Question Re: best practices

Rémi Després remi.despres at
Thu May 12 10:07:43 CEST 2011

Le 9 mai 2011 à 18:38, Austin Schutz a écrit :

> I'm curious about this having read a couple books about the IPv4 -> IPv6 transition. I would like to know what the current best practice is.
> Given: A small set ipv6 only network running various protocols, call this the "IPv6 only server network", and a large legacy client IPv4 network, call this, say, "The Internet".
> In this scenario the operator of the ipv6 network may not have the luxury of implementing dual stack on the legacy IPv4 network. Given that the methodology of providing access to this network via NA(P)T-PT has been obsoleted, what is the current best practice for solving this problem?

If the expectation is that a server that isn't given any IPv4 address (not even one with a restricted port set) would be reachable by an IPv4-only client, there is AFAIK no operational solution today:
- IPv6-enabled servers that need to be accessible from IPv4-only clients must have an IPv4 address.
- IPv4-enabled clients that need to reach IPv6-only servers must also be IPv6-enabled.

> I'm not really interested in a philosophical sort of "what I think should happen" sort of debate, but rather a practical "this is what I have implemented in my network" or "this is how I would solve this issue given currently available equipment, software, and configurations techniques".
> Answers involving proposed but not implemented drafts are interesting but not necessarily helpful.

A proposal exists for ISP's to easily offer IPv6 connectivity to clients that are behind legacy NAT44's, provided these clients support the necessary function (draft-despres-intarea-6a44-00).
But, right, it can't be "helpful" today. 
You may find it "interesting" though.


> Answers much appreciated.
> Austin

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list