If an ISP provides dual-stack to the customer, then the customer only uses IPv4 when required and then will only use NAT444 to compensate for a lack of IPv4 address space when an IPv4 connection is required. What am I missing?
> On Aug 27, 2020, at 1:20 AM, Mark Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 27 Aug 2020, at 15:58, Bjørn Mork <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Brian Johnson <[email protected]> writes: >> >>>> 1) It needs *much less* IPv4 addresses (in the NAT64) for the same number >>>> of customers. >>> >>> I cannot see how this is even possible. If I use private space >>> internally to the CGN, then the available external space is the same >>> and the internal customers are the same and I can do the same over sub >>> ratio under both circumstance. Tell me how the math is different. >> >> Because NAT64 implies DNS64, which avoids NATing any dual stack service. >> This makes a major difference today. > > Only if you don’t have a CLAT installed and for home users that is suicide > at there is too much IPv4 only equipment. > > What really pushes traffic to IPv6 is that hosts prefer IPv6 by default. This > works as long as the clients see a dual stack network. > > And no NAT64 does not imply DNS64. You can publish a ipv4only.arpa zone with > the mappings for the NAT64. There are now also RA options for publishing > these > mappings. There are also DHCPv6 options. > > Mark > >> Bjørn > > -- > Mark Andrews, ISC > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: [email protected] >
