while I’m not a fan of NAT64, CGN etc (but understand in some situations the 
need for it), I completely agree that companies will be looking for consultants 
to help with this in some scenarios (both large and small companies alike) - 
this has been ongoing in some larger companies for many years already (IPv6 
adoption) and often through resident engineer placements from vendors 


> On Oct 27, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Some consultant needs to specialize in this and help folks provision, 
> configure, deploy, test etc. 
> We all need this or will need this. 
>  
> From: Faisal Imtiaz <>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 8:31 PM
> To: af <>
> Subject: [AFMUG] Fwd: [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt
>  
> An excellent detailed solution  (from one of the other forums).
>  
> Faisal Imtiaz
> Snappy Internet & Telecom
> 7266 SW 48 Street
> Miami, FL 33155
> Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
> 
> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected]
>  
>> From: "Tim Way" <[email protected]>
>> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:01:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt
> 
>> Art,
>> So I know of two solid methods that could solve your problem. Neither are 
>> super awesome and both would involve NAT.
>>  
>> 1. IPv6 only to the client with NAT64 and DNS64 to handle IPv4 only 
>> connectivity
>> 2. IPv4 CGN Shared Address Space, RFC 6598 100.64.0.0/10 
>> <http://100.64.0.0/10>, and IPv6 Global Unicast running in Dual Stack
>>  
>> Either one would work. I apologize in advance for the long post that follows.
>>  
>> I've only done the configurations on Cisco routers with the radios just 
>> passing traffic at layer 2. I'd have to check the feature set of your 
>> routers routing wise but it shouldn't be hard. It also could be built in a 
>> lab with static routing largely. I think Mikrotik supports NAT64 but again 
>> for a lab environment any recent Cisco device could be used with IP Services 
>> licensing.
>>  
>> Your address plan for your global unicast IPv6 space comes into play. This 
>> is how I would lab it up including moving routing to the tower with the CPE 
>> in bridge mode:
>>  
>> Your fictional IPv6 prefix: 9999:8888::/32
>>  
>> Your NAT64 Prefix: 9999:8888:cc00::/96
>>  
>> Customer DHCPv6-PD Allocation Prefix: 9999:8888:aa00::/40
>> Your fictional customer #1: The Johnson Family, 9999:8888:aa00:0100::/56
>> Your fictional customer #2: The Billings' Family, 9999:8888:aa00:0200::/56
>>  
>> Fictional Tower 1
>> ISP Mgmt VLAN of CPE: 11, 9999:8888:bb00:0011::/64
>> ISP Customer VLAN of CPE: 12, 9999:8888:bb00:0012::/64
>> ISP Router at the tower on VLAN 11: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::1/64
>> ISP Router at the tower on VLAN 12: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::1/64
>>  
>> The Johnson Family Setup:
>> ISP CPE VLAN 11 IP: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::f/64
>> Customer's Netgear WAN Interface: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::f/64
>> Customer's Netgear LAN Interface: 9999:8888:aa00:010a::1/64
>> Customer's Netgear Guest WiFi: 9999:8888:aa00:010b::1/64
>>  
>> The Billings' Family Setup:
>> ISP CPE VLAN 11 IP: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::e/64
>> Customer's Netgear WAN Interface: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::e/64
>> Customer's Netgear LAN Interface: 9999:8888:aa00:020a::1/64
>> Customer's Netgear Guest WiFi: 9999:8888:aa00:020b::1/64
>>  
>> 1. You'd bridge VLAN 12 through the CPE to customer's WAN interface as the 
>> native VLAN and put the IP on VLAN 11.
>> 2. If you use static routing and manual address assignment to eliminate 
>> variables in the lab you'll want to add static routes on the tower router 
>> for the ::/56 prefixes that would be allocated to each customer. Normally 
>> these    routes will be injected into the routing table at the DHCPv6 router 
>> and could be distributed from there.
>> 3. The last piece of the puzzle will be adding in the NAT64 and DNS64 
>> devices. BIND can do DNS64 and you could use a Cisco router to do the NAT64. 
>> You'd want the "Customer's Netgear" to use the DNS64 server as it's upstream 
>> DNS server to ensure that it receives AAAA records for sites that only have 
>> A records. This is the fragile component of the DNS64 and NAT64 deployment 
>> because it requires the customers computer or router uses your resolver. You 
>> will want to ensure the router performing NAT64 is advertising the prefix it 
>> is using for NAT64 into your IGP or that your default routed traffic lands 
>> on that NAT64 to ensure it is routed correctly.
>> 
>> This should get you a functional IPv6 only customer network that only 
>> returns AAAA records for all DNS requests. It's a little late so I apologize 
>> for any mistakes in the addressing. Also I will think about doing this with 
>> routing at the CPE as well overnight and add that response. I'd be very 
>> intrigued to see this in a lab environment with the fictional customers all 
>> setup to see how NAT64 and DNS64 actually works in reality instead of just 
>> implementing CGN which I see as the less visible or resilient change for the 
>> customer. That said I see the pure IPv6 deployment with NAT64 and DNS64 as 
>> the better long term solution if you could reliably ensure your customers 
>> use your DHCP server or ensure that your tech support says to reset that 
>> right away. It also would break a customer using OpenDNS to restrict 
>> web-sites from their kid's for example.
>>  
>> Thanks,
>>  
>> Tim
>>  
>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Art Stephens <[email protected] <>> wrote:
>>> Tim,
>>> So we are an IPV4 ISP not able to get any more IPV4 address space. We have 
>>> IPV6 working in office, and on server network. 
>>> I have working windows and linux IPV6 only configured machines but 
>>> obviously they can only access IPV6 capable web sites and such.
>>>  
>>> But we will need to start assigning IPV6 WAN address to customer routers 
>>> and UBNT radios in radio router mode when we get a CRM that supports IPV6.
>>> I am a little aware of NAT64 but all my googling for NAT64 applications 
>>> yields NAT64 for networks with Public address on one side and private 
>>> addresses on the other.
>>> We try to keep all of our network WAN on public addresses.
>>>  
>>> So far I have tried three so called ipv6 ready routers and could get none 
>>> of them to work with static IPV6 addressing.
>>>  
>>> Hope that explains what you are looking for.
>>>  
>>> Thanks for your help.
>>>  
>>>  
>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Tim Way <[email protected] <>> wrote:
>>>> Dual stack is a different architecture than having two separate networks 
>>>> running with one running IPv4 and one running IPv6. To connect the two 
>>>> disparate networks you would need to perform address family translation 
>>>> (NAT64). In dual-stack it will prefer IPv6 when available, minus happy 
>>>> eyeballs, but otherwise has legs or transit via both protocols to access 
>>>> the necessary resource if it is either IPv4 or IPv6.
>>>> To start I would ask to clarify what you are trying to do and I'd be happy 
>>>> to help in anyway I can. I'm a bit of an IPv6 crazy.
>>>>  
>>>> Tim
>>>>  
>>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Art Stephens <[email protected] <>> 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Any out there successfully deployed dual stack network can share what 
>>>>> equipment used for pure ipv6 access to ipv4 networks?
>>>>> 
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Arthur Stephens
>>>>> Senior Networking Technician
>>>>> Ptera Inc.
>>>>> PO Box 135
>>>>> 24001 E Mission Suite 50
>>>>> Liberty Lake, WA 99019 
>>>>> 509-927-7837 <tel:509-927-7837> 
>>>>> ptera.com <http://ptera.com/> |
>>>>> facebook.com/PteraInc <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> | twitter.com/Ptera 
>>>>> <http://twitter.com/Ptera>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>  
>>>>> "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and 
>>>>> is intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. 
>>>>> Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or 
>>>>> opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are 
>>>>> not intended to represent those of the company." 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wireless mailing list
>>>>> [email protected] <>
>>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
>>>>> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wireless mailing list
>>>> [email protected] <>
>>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
>>>> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Arthur Stephens
>>> Senior Networking Technician
>>> Ptera Inc.
>>> PO Box 135
>>> 24001 E Mission Suite 50
>>> Liberty Lake, WA 99019 
>>> 509-927-7837 <tel:509-927-7837> 
>>> ptera.com <http://ptera.com/> |
>>> facebook.com/PteraInc <http://facebook.com/PteraInc> | twitter.com/Ptera 
>>> <http://twitter.com/Ptera>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>  
>>> "This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is 
>>> intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. 
>>> Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or 
>>> opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not 
>>> intended to represent those of the company." 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wireless mailing list
>>> [email protected] <>
>>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
>>> <http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wireless mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Reply via email to