'Upgrading' NAT64 to 464XLAT?

[Dick Visser]

I didn't mean to spark off another translation war ;-)

I realise that there are downsides to every translation technique.
I'm not trying to have the perfect solution, because I know that
doesn't exist yet.
Instead, I'd like to have a network segment that has the highest
possible ration of IPv6 to IPv4, where all my users' application
continue to work.
The history here is as follows:

pre-2002:  public IPv4 /24, and 'everything works'
2003: public IPv4 /24, and a public IPv4 /48. 'Everything works', but
some apps only use IPv4
2011: NAT64/DNS64 test. Most stuff works over IPv6, and could do with
a single IPv4 address, but some stuff breaks. <- not an option.

The next step I'm trying to achieve is:

2014: <X> Can do with a single external IPv4 address, and and everything works.


I thought it would be nice to try 464XLAT as <X> and get some
practical experience with it.




On 26 November 2013 10:47, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo at google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Marco Sommani <marco.sommani at iit.cnr.it>
> wrote:
>>
>> Well, I understand that there is value in moving towards an IPv6-only
>> backbone, but, even in that case, I find it safer to provide IPv4 via
>> DS-Lite rather than via 464xLAT. In my view, translating between different
>> IP versions can only produce more problems.
>
>
> Agreed. Actually, what you want is MAP-E. Unfortunately, in 3GPP networks,
> the encapsulation used by MAP-E breaks DPI mechanisms that many operators
> use for billing.



-- 
Dick Visser
System & Networking Engineer
TERENA Secretariat
Singel 468 D, 1017 AW Amsterdam
The Netherlands