[v4v6interim] "No DNS changes" in draft-wing-nat-pt-replacement-comparison-01

[Andrew Sullivan <[e-mail]>]

I think I understand now what my problem was that I was trying to
state (incompetently, I think) at the mic.

In the overview of the items we were to discuss this afternoon, and in
draft-wing-nat-pt-replacement-comparison-01 table 2, we have this
claim:

   +--------------+-----------------+------------+---------------------+
   |   Proposal   |  ISP's Internal | DNS Impact |  Carrier Grade NAT  |
   |              |     Network     |            |                     |
   +--------------+-----------------+------------+---------------------+
   |    A+P-v4    |       IPv4      |  no change |     (no CGN, if     |
   |              |   destination   |            |   subscriber's NAT  |
   |              |   port routing  |            |   support A+P NAT)  |
   +--------------+-----------------+------------+---------------------+
   |    A+P-v6    |    IPv4/IPv6    |  no change |     (no CGN, if     |
   |              |      tunnel     |            |   subscriber's NAT  |
   |              |                 |            |   support A+P NAT)  |
   +--------------+-----------------+------------+---------------------+

I'm confused by the DNS Impact claim of "no change" here, if the
suggestion is that A+P is going to help v6-only clients talk to the
target hosts.  Is it instead the case that A+P is just not going to
help v6-only hosts?  That is, unless I'm misunderstanding badly (and
it wouldn't be the first time), a v6-only host can't talk to a v4-only
host using A+P without getting some way of talking to v4 networks,
period.  So maybe the DNS Impact in that table should be like NAT444?

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
[e-mail]
[phone] x104
http://www.commandprompt.com/
_______________________________________________
v4v6interim mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim