In an IPv6 future, how will you solve IPv4 connectivity?

[Truman Boyes]

On 10 Oct 2010, at 11:43 PM, marcelo bagnulo braun wrote:

> El 10/10/10 16:10, Truman Boyes escribió:
>> 
>> On 10 Oct 2010, at 10:05 PM, Roger Wiklund wrote:
>> 
>>> Let's say for arguments sake that the prophecy is true, and in late
>>> 2011/2012 a new user can only get an IPv6 address.
>>> 
>>> Have you guys concidered/tested how you will solve these users
>>> connectivity to the IPv4 Internet?
>>> 
>>> I guess NAT-PT is out of the picture,
>>> NAT64?
>>> DS-Lite?
>>> 
>>> Also, as these new users are IPv6 only, how can IPv4 hosts communicate
>>> with them? 4to6 NAT?
>>> 
>>> Thanks for your comments,
>>> 
>>> /Roger
>> 
>> I think the answer to this question depends upon the type of network (ie. mobile, internet application hosting, fixed line broadband, etc). DS-LITE would scale well, but would require CPE that obviously supported this feature.
> mmm, dslite, is about v4 hosts accessing to v4 servers (and using v6 in the ISP), so no translation is involved, so it would allow a v6 node to access a v4 server.

Yes, however devices would need to be able to tunnel IPv4 inside IPv6. It's not translation, but the tunneling support is the key to traversing an IPv6 network.

>> NAT64 is simple, but it presents issues with tethering v4 devices among other issues.
> nat64 is the right tool for this particular problem, afaict

I am not so sure about this being the right tool. Let's say that you have a mobile subscriber handset that is IPv6-only. The SP can turn on NAT64 and for the most part, the device would not need to care about IPv4. However, if you wanted to use the phone as a tethered modem/gateway on an IPv4 host, it would not work. 

> About how to enable access for communications initiated from the v4 land to the v6 servers, NAT64 is compatible with current nat traversla techniques, so, that would one way to do it (i.e. use STUN, TURN, ICE and the like)
> 
> Regards, marcelo
> 
> 
>> It is quite possible that dual stack to subscribers will be common, with private IPv4 and public IPv6. The service provider would natively route IPv6 and perform NAT44 for IPv4.
>> 
>> Truman
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20101011/26472457/attachment.htm>