[Bp_ipv6] Request for clarification NAT v NAT

Susan Chalmers susan at chalmers.associates
Thu Nov 26 11:04:11 EST 2015


Thanks Alejandro.

IPv4 and IPv6 are two different protocols. IPv6 is not backwards compatible
with IPv4. Devices that communicate using only IPv6 cannot communicate with
devices that communicate using only IPv4. For an IPv4-only endpoint to
interwork with an IPv6-only service, and vice-versa,  translation between
IPv4 and IPv6 is required. Network Address Translation, described above,
not only permits multiple devices to share one IP address, but it also
plays an important role in deploying IPv6 in conjunction with IPv4 and
allows IPv4 and IPv6 to interwork. This translation is also referred to as
Address Family Translation (AFT).

These are two different purposes to the layperson - saving space and
internetworking. Perhaps I'm being too specific for my own good?

I am moving to another State (well, a District, actually) today, so will be
offline, but can come back online during the weekend to wrap things up.

Thanks again everyone for your contributions. I think the document is
shaping up quite nicely.

Sincerely,
Susan



Susan Chalmers
susan at chalmers.associates

*CHALMERS* & ASSOCIATES
http://chalmers.associates

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Alejandro Acosta <
alejandroacostaalamo at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Susan,
>   Is there any part of the document that particularly worries you?
>   I just took a quick look to the document in the review platform and for
> me the explanation looks quite good.
>
>   But anyhow this is very difficult topic to summarize in few words and
> unfortunately I presume few people will complain with whatever definition
> we use.
>   From my point of view the definition & function found in Wikipedia is
> great: "Network address translation (NAT) is a methodology of remapping one
> IP address space into another by modifying network address information in
> Internet Protocol (IP) datagram packet headers while they are in transit
> across a traffic routing device"
>
> Regards,
>
> Alejandro,
>
>
> El 11/26/2015 a las 10:43 AM, Susan Chalmers escribió:
>
> Hello colleagues,
>
> During the discussion, the function of NAT was originally described as the
> address space saving kind, and so this was how NAT was treated in the
> paper. Through comments made on the review platform, other functions of NAT
> were described - more or less enabling translation and thus necessary and
> helping the transition.
>
> I want to be sure that the differences here are clear to the reader. Could
> someone help shed a bit of light at a high level?
>
> Thanks,
> Susan
>
>
> Susan Chalmers
> susan at chalmers.associates
>
> *CHALMERS* & ASSOCIATES
> http://chalmers.associates
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bp_ipv6 mailing listBp_ipv6 at intgovforum.orghttp://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
> http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/attachments/20151126/b2518121/attachment.html>


More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list