So we deploy v6 addresses to clients, and save the remaining v4 addresses for servers. Problem solved? -brandon On 2/17/09, Nathan Ward <nanog@daork.net> wrote:
On 18/02/2009, at 3:23 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
I find it a shame that NAT-PT has become depreciated
the ietf has recanted and is hurriedly trying to get this back on track. of course, to save face, the name has to be changed.
Sort of - except it is only for IPv6 "clients" to connect to named IPv4 "servers". NAT-PT allowed for the opposite direction, IPv4 "clients" connecting to IPv6 "servers" - NAT64 does not.
The server must have an A record in DNS, and the client must use that name to connect to - just like NAT-PT.
-- Nathan Ward
-- Sent from my mobile device Brandon Galbraith Voice: 630.400.6992 Email: brandon.galbraith@gmail.com