28 Sep
2007
28 Sep
'07
2:12 p.m.
On 28-sep-2007, at 22:57, Alain Durand wrote:
Tunneling is great, but it requires to allocate an IPv4 address... that I may not have in the first place.
If an IPv6-only box is going to talk to the IPv4 world, at some point, the traffic needs to hit a dual stack system that can do the IPv6/IPv4 translation. I think an approach where you have a regular IPv4 NAT and then tunnel the RFC 1918 addresses over an IPv6-only network would work better than NAT-PT. If the tunnel provisioning system is flexible enough, it could even give unNATed IPv4 addresses to (just) the hosts that need them, possibly only temporarily.