Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario

[Alain Durand <alain_durand@cable.comcast.com>]

Brian,

It appears that the 'crude diagram below' is identical to the latest
iteration of 464.

  - Alain.


On 6/16/08 7:09 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> draft-bagnulo-behave-nat64-00.txt is being discussed
> over on the BEHAVE list, and covers the case of an IPv6-only
> initiator reaching an IPv4-only server.
> 
> I believe that we also need to come up with a solution for an
> IPv4 initiator reaching a server with IPv6-only connectivity.
> My question is whether we can be satisfied with a solution
> that requires that server to be dual stack, so that it can
> tunnel IPv4 in IPv6 to a conventional IPv4-to-IPv4 NAT.
> (Crude diagram below.)
> That seems a lot simpler than developing complete MNAT-PT
> or SHANTI solutions, which in can case can never really
> offer more transparency that conventional NAT.
> 
> If so, we could incorporate a tunnel-to-NAT scenario in
> draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-pb-statement-req.
> 
>     Brian
> 
> +------+-----+-------+          +------+-----+          +-----+------+
> |Server|IPv4 |Encaps |__________|Decaps|NAT44|__________|IPv4 |Client|
> |      |stack|in IPv6| IPv6 net |      |     | IPv4 net |stack|      |
> +------+-----+-------+          +------+-----+          +-----+------+
> 
>