[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Wg-ipv6-guide] (TOC 7.4) NAT
Dear Geoff,
Thank you so much for your valuable comment as well as a revised
draft. I would like to adopt your draft for further review.
If anyone has a comment on this please let us know.
Best regards,
Toshi
From: Geoff Huston <gih@telstra.net>
Subject: Re: [Wg-ipv6-guide] (TOC 7.4) NAT
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 07:38:58 +1100
> It would be better if a more neutral wording was used here,
> and whatever your personal opinions may be about the
> use of NATs, the undeniable fact is that NAT is a very commonly
> deployed technology.
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> 7.4 NAT
>
> RFC1631 describes Network Address Translation (NAT). NAT allows
> a network device to translate address fields in the IP packet header
> as they pass through the NAT device. NAT is commonly
> used in IPv4 to undertake a limited form of connectivity between
> private and public address realm.
>
> NAT is not a standardized technology for IPv6, and APNIC policies
> do not require or encourage any user to deploy NAT in a IPv6 context.
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
>
> > |
> > | fewer public IP address thereby assisting the goal of conservation.
> > |
> > | However many drawbacks have been cited with the use of NAT, and the
> > | goal of conservation is less important compared to IPv4, so that
> > | APNIC policies do not require any ISP or Internet user to employ
> > | Network Address Translation (NAT), as current IPv4 address policies
> > | do not either.
>
>
>
>
> At 08:41 PM 18/12/2003, Tomohiro -INSTALLER- wrote:
>
> >Hi Hosaka-san and all,
> >
> > | Please refer to the draft for [ToC 7.4 NAT] as below.
> > |
> > | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > | 7.4 NAT
> > |
> > | RFC1631 describes Network Address Translation (NAT). NAT makes consume
> > | fewer public IP address thereby assisting the goal of conservation.
> > |
> > | However many drawbacks have been cited with the use of NAT, and the
> > | goal of conservation is less important compared to IPv4, so that
> > | APNIC policies do not require any ISP or Internet user to employ
> > | Network Address Translation (NAT), as current IPv4 address policies
> > | do not either.
> > |
> > | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > |
> > | Your comments and suggestions are highly appreciated.
> >
> >I think it need to clarify what the NAT is in this context. In IPv6
> >environment, IPv4 <-> IPv6 translation is also called 'NAT'.
> >
> >
> ># IMHO, IPv6/IPv6 NAT should not be used in IPv6 environment.
> >
> >--
> >Tomohiro Fujisaki, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Wg-ipv6-guide mailing list
> >Wg-ipv6-guide@lists.apnic.net
> >http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/wg-ipv6-guide
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wg-ipv6-guide mailing list
> Wg-ipv6-guide@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/wg-ipv6-guide
>
