28 Sep
2007
28 Sep
'07
5:38 p.m.
On 10/21/07 5:13 PM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
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.
The issue here is that the translation would have to occur at the box that is decapsulating the packet, as the mapping private-v4 to v4 would have to be indexed by some kind of tunnel ID that identifies the customer. If you translate v4 to v6 at the home gateway, you have a global v6 address to identify that customer and you can do the reverse translation (back to v4) pretty much anywhere you want in the service provider network. - Alain.