Re: [v6ops] combination of NAT64/DNS64 and NAT44

GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com> Thu, 18 April 2013 08:12 UTC

Return-Path: <phdgang@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BB9B21F8E5C for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_13=0.6, 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 LeO8PZ2CVH2c for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qe0-f42.google.com (mail-qe0-f42.google.com [209.85.128.42]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E34A21F8A48 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qe0-f42.google.com with SMTP id cz11so1489422qeb.1 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=UBK58CPD7t3h5H/3QgidoOrWWf2uYjunvIS23IaMzKs=; b=uJTFSSnSEUfb7YMHV/AhZhshEhIyYEm06QBiSiRdBmBraoeCfcNjmKPfQVlLdLB7Ek iUcf2X4fPlGghmW18CGFAAqbQ8ig+eIt4qC6TMcei/S3HmEnJHftmkJxESfxrCG3VDji 5xO4oEeaqEmc5OXclCRJm56Cboe2cgXFmeC6RbDu+LoxcMWDREiHkJHxlZCKtCJyuJv4 WR0sDoSKd5T4pPV8FRuPNQBRgG2Z+6CJlwZOAHZf9uKj6TeH0gLiWHM6K5DrDKhzdPLt WZM3BxuVYsqB7rDZD/F6n3Ikm21KPPz7Z09zt5tzZ2mYmUWMf2qhNMgmubVr3E8cORh6 yhFA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.39.137 with SMTP id p9mr10452676qek.47.1366272734981; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.49.5.129 with HTTP; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 01:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304171646450.23668@uplift.swm.pp.se>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304171206080.23668@uplift.swm.pp.se> <516EB4EC.7010102@viagenie.ca> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1304171646450.23668@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:12:14 +0800
Message-ID: <CAM+vMETgJHsjCEhJF0Jne2YXYsp75i21GdEjoUZzturdGQZEqg@mail.gmail.com>
From: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] combination of NAT64/DNS64 and NAT44
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 08:12:19 -0000

2013/4/17, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>:
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2013, Simon Perreault wrote:
>
>> It might not be immediately useful to you, but you should know about this
>>
>> draft:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic
>
> Yep. Also RFC6877, but my guess would be that the 464XLAT would be
> disabled when WAN port is dual stack?
>
>> Other than that, my main feedback would be: you want to provide NATed
>> IPv4 alongside NAT64, doesn't that defeat the purpose of NAT64, i.e.
>> operating an IPv6-only network?
>
> I want all kinds of terminals to be supported using single APN. I don't
> want to care if the device connects using DS or single stack IPv4 or IPv6.

Are you seeing IPv6-only PDN context?  It's rather interested to hear
more about it.

BRs

Gang

> I don't control the end devices.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>