Re: draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience-02

Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com> Mon, 09 July 2012 17:38 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A633611E80C9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:38:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.539
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.539 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.060, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D755JG41vZrl for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E080911E809C for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:38:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pbcwy7 with SMTP id wy7so20142753pbc.31 for <ipv6@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=aDyOUYvGYWTpJgkclRU6v5tMdKJErpbInyYFh9Wo5P4=; b=LmZ5KSrJIBEhdg338eXzr9kH75bTTbDQbMK9Mwp9rEs2Gsq4lXf4oy3kT3GC/TNqhS i2kfdypYsban5cFpfW7PHkFz3zsoXosBEhiZymdN96ypKA0SabMYeIWf8H2vgtzZCmuQ EDl8LpCt2l7neiYtJFW2xNRg8bpm3+0wOfPbjJNd6PHshq7ZZK6hLF3K4QBYnjc2AHoz 6rdZt13ru2DxhavEwNdhp/3w1v1p38Xiyfbi1yZhYt0SUIWX8qGu7+bZv7PQvINHDrnt cd8RaGYzKZxMxDdVuuUsNoSf0cDRgtw75jtJrpGDGWdIh6r/MFqhyQrzG/I7coC924NB ag4A==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.239.9 with SMTP id vo9mr62277544pbc.41.1341855515132; Mon, 09 Jul 2012 10:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.142.100.9 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAcfCw=ECvTGFGMabScFA+CQkw4_wTAfYg=5r=UQ4PBKcHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FF696AA.3050508@tut.fi> <23986.1341586765@marajade.sandelman.ca> <CAC8QAcfCw=ECvTGFGMabScFA+CQkw4_wTAfYg=5r=UQ4PBKcHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 10:38:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGTQf-VWawsDJWy4NTHePqWuw5LT39hrZ1E8XDzkHEVVGg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience-02
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: ipv6@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipv6>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 17:38:10 -0000

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Michael Richardson
> <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> "Aleksi" == Aleksi Suhonen <Aleksi.Suhonen@tut.fi> writes:
>>     Aleksi> Within an hour, all the IPv4 addresses in the pool for our
>>     Aleksi> NAT64 were registered to this one device.
>>
>> Do I understand that you attempt to provide a single IPv4 address 1:1
>> with a an internal IPv6 address? (NAT vs NAPT)
>
> It seems like this is what is called stateless NAT64.
> I am not sure if there is any document specifying stateless NAT64?
>
> Regards,
>
> Behcet

Stateless = http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6145

Stateful = http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6146

If the goal is providing a dynamic access from an IPv6-only network
toward IPv4-only internet, RFC 6146 is the optimal choice.

RFC 6145 has limited use for the cases for IPv6 - > IPv4 since it is
1:1 mapping.  Most people do IPv6 because IPv4 is limited, so ...
doing 1:1 mapping does not really buy you anything.  You can just use
IPv4 and achieve the same scale.

The best use case i have seen for RFC 6145 is for the data center
environment http://fud.no/talks/20120417-RIPE64-The_Case_for_IPv6_Only_Data_Centres.pdf
 as well as the mapping of the entire IPv4 internet into IPv6 as is
the case of 464XLAT CLAT in the IPv4->IPv6  scenario.

CB