'Upgrading' NAT64 to 464XLAT?
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Tue Nov 26 09:31:24 CET 2013
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 05:22:15PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote:
> Are you suggesting that we should have designed 464xlat on day one instead
> of DNS64? That's a bit like saying that we should have designed fiber
> optics without having copper. If DNS64 had not been designed and
> implemented we wouldn't have 464xlat today.
I think he's saying that everyone should be using dual-stack, because
that's so much easier to roll out and maintain, and there's still plenty
of IPv4 left in the US region.
(Let me say that if *I* had a mobile network where I pretty much know
what sort of devices and stacks are being used, I'd go for IPv6-only PDP
plus 464xlat as well. On "DSL style" end user connections, with a
gazillion of unknown devices and applications, I'd more likely go for
IPv6+DS-Lite or IPv6+MAP - or full dual-stack *if* I had the addresses,
which is one of the small obstacles Doug seems to conveniently overlook...)
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
More information about the ipv6-ops
mailing list