464 scanarios - identifying the variety

[Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr>]

Alain Durand  - Le 6/17/08 2:21 AM :
 > It appears that the 'crude diagram below' is identical to the latest
> iteration of 464.

> On 6/16/08 7:09 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If so, we could incorporate a tunnel-to-NAT scenario in
> > draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-pb-statement-req.

> > +------+-----+-------+          +------+-----+          +-----+------+
> > |Server|IPv4 |Encaps |__________|Decaps|NAT44|__________|IPv4 |Client|
> > |      |stack|in IPv6| IPv6 net |      |     | IPv4 net |stack|      |
> > +------+-----+-------+          +------+-----+          +-----+------+

A variety variety of 464 configurations, with pros and cons, are being 
discussed.
IMO they deserve some clarification.
(464 is taken here as meaning "any scenario where a source v4 packet has 
to be delivered to a destination in v4, possibly modified, via a v6-only 
zone.)

Let:
- Cx     mean  Client using x packets (4 or 6)
- Sy     mean  Server using y packets (4 or 6)
- 4p     mean  private IPv4 (10... etc)
- 4/6    mean  v4 in v6 encap-decap
- NATxy  mean  NAT with x inside to y outside
- Bc     mean IPv4 plus Address and port Borrowing Protocol-Client
- Bs     mean IPv4 plus Address and port Borrowing Protocol-Server

Then we have (at least) the following scenarios:

1.
(C4 4)--4p--(NAT44 4/6)--6--(4/6+ S4)
    The "Tunnel to NAT scenario" above of Brian
    (where the server needs a modified dual stack).

2.
(C4 4)--4p--(NAT46 6)--6--(6 NAT64)--4--(4 S4)
    The "464NAT demo at IETF71" of Alain, ref 
http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_XXI/PDF/tuesday/464-ARIN_Durand.pdf.

3.
(C4 4)--4p--(NAT44 4/6)--6--(4/6 NAT44)--4--(4 S4)
    The SNAT of Ralph Droms, ref 
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-droms-softwires-snat-00.txt.



4.
(C4 4)--4p--(NAT44 Bc 4/6)--6--(4/6 Bs 4)--4--(4 S4)
    My NAT44+APBP scenario, ref sec. 2 of 
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-despres-v6ops-apbp-00.txt.


5.
(C4 Bc 4/6)--6--(4/6 Bs)--4--(4 S4)
    My APBP-E2E scenario,  sec 5.2 of 
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-despres-v6ops-apbp-00.txt.



Using some kind of shorthand like this one would IMO help identifying 
which scenario does what.


Regards.

Rémi