NAT444 alone is not enough.
You will need to deploy it along with 6rd or DS-lite.
Whilst you still have global v4, use it. The best is to deploy
dual-stack, but that won't last for too long.
Regards,
as-
On 1 Sep 2011, at 15:36, Serge Vautour wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Things I understand: IPv6 is the long term solution to IPv4 exhaustion. For
> IPv6 to work correctly, most of the IPv4 content has to be on IPv6. That's
> not there yet. IPv6 deployment to end users is not trivial (end user support,
> CPE support, etc...). Translation techniques are generally evil. IPv6->IPv4
> still requires 1 IPv4 IP per end user or else you're doing NAT. IPv4->IPv6
> (1-1) doesn't solve our main problem of giving users access to the IPv4
> Internet.
>
>
> I expect like most companies we're faced with having to extend the life of
> IPv4 since our users will continue to want access to the IPv4 content. Doing
> that by giving them an IPv6 address is not very feasible yet for many
> reasons. NAT444 seems like the only solution available while we slowly
> transition over to IPv6 over the next 20 years. Based on the this RFC, NAT444
> breaks a lot of applications!
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-donley-nat444-impacts-01
>
> Has anyone deployed NAT444? Can folks share their experiences? Does it really
> break this many apps? What other options do we have?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Serge
