Hi, On Sun, May 17, 2015 at 04:49:29PM +0000, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > Yes, of course you are right that this is a complex issue, but there's a > widespread tendency to carry the old limitations of today's IPv4 to IPv6 > even if there's no real need to do so. And Marc calling NAT64 a working > solution despite the fact that it breaks IPv6 the same way NAT broke > IPv4 really asks to be balanced by a similarly oversimplified statement > going the other way:-)
Actually, the whole point is that NAT64 does not touch IPv6, so it is
not "breaking IPv6" - it ensures that IPv4 legacy is still reachable,
even if you're inside an IPv6-only network.
Which sounds quite positive to me, given the alternative is "run dual-stack
everywhere, forever, because someone out there might still be IPv4-only"...
Carriers can't "just turn off IPv4" if users still connect to IPv4-only
sites... so what is worse, NAT44/CGN and dual-stack all the way to the
client, or nice and shiny IPv6-only at the edges, and NAT64 for talking
to the old Internet?
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
pgphKg5uWLgmX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
