[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bump in the Wire w/ attachment
I think that you are correct. The BIW draft
describes a reinvention, or specialization, of
NAT-PT. A BIW translator is a NAT-PT that is
dedicated to serving a single IPv4-only host. In
this restricted role, there are differences
between a BIW translator and an RFC2766
NAT-PT. These differences are in the details,
however. It is still doing address and protocol translation.
Here are two major differences between a BIW translator and an RFC2766 NAT-PT:
A BIW translator uses private IPv4 addresses to
represent IPv6-only hosts. As a result,
IPv4/IPv6 address bindings can persist
indefinitely, since there's no rush to reclaim a
global IPv4 address for another host to use.
A BIW translator serves as the host's proxy on a
dual IPv4/IPv6 network, so it needs to pass some
IPv4 packets from the host to the network side
without protocol translation. It must also
participate in SLAAC and DHCP on the host's behalf.
At 03:35 PM 10/9/2006, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
Le lundi 9 octobre 2006 22:08, vous avez écrit :
> Here is a follow up to my previous mail the with Bump in the Wire
> draft as an attachment.
I ony read the document ?diagonaly?, and I might actually have gotten it
wrong, but I have a feeling this is a reinvention of NAT-PT.
Could you explain how does this new mechanism compare to the latter?