On Mar 10, 2009, at 18:20, Fred Baker wrote:
On Mar 10, 2009, at 6:03 PM, james woodyatt wrote:
Yes, it breaks end-to-end addressability, but not really any worse
than the NAT66 standard that everyone will soon be deploying
everywhere at once, because honestly, who cares that NAT66 lets you
manually provision the DNS with pre-translated AAAA records?
Or use Stun and DDNS to do so dynamically?
how do we deploy DNS records in IPv4?
Yes, and with NAPT44, we use NAT-PMP or UPnP-IGD to find exterior port
numbers and use those with DDNS to register SRV records for DNS-SD.
It's a trivial extension to those existing protocols to make them
support IPv6 for the same purpose with NAPT66. This is what I predict
we will end up doing in the long run. In fact, I wouldn't be
surprised to learn that somewhere in one of these buildings at Apple
Campus, someone here has already done it.
NAT-PMP, one might be tempted to observe, has only one place in one of
the packet formats where an IP address appears. It's really not hard
to make it carry an IPv6 address instead of an IPv4 one.
--
james woodyatt <[email protected]>
member of technical staff, communications engineering
_______________________________________________
nat66 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
