[Bp_ipv6] Request for clarification NAT v NAT
lordmwesh at gmail.com
Thu Nov 26 16:02:03 EST 2015
It is true that NAT does not enable transition but actually has been a
hindrance to the uptake of IPV6
On Nov 26, 2015 9:30 PM, "Seun Ojedeji" <seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2
> Kindly excuse brevity and typos.
> On 26 Nov 2015 17:04, "Susan Chalmers" <susan at chalmers.associates> wrote:
> > Thanks Alejandro.
> > 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).
> SO: The technology that allows v4 and v6 to communicate (one of such
> mechanism being NAT64) is not the same with that which allows multiple
> devices to communicate on the Internet using one IP (which is NAT, NAT44,
> even NAT444...etc ;-) )
> > These are two different purposes to the layperson - saving space and
> internetworking. Perhaps I'm being too specific for my own good?
> SO: Yes you are right they are 2 different purposes but there are also 2
> different technologies that achieves each of the purpose. So in essence,
> It's a combination of both NAT64 and NAT that would make what you've
> described above possible.
> That said, if we are talking about v6 promotions, then we should get NAT
> out of the picture as much as possible. NAT64 should also remain in the
> picture just for a while (though that could be a long time from now).
> > 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 list
> >>> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
> >>> http://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
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bp_ipv6 mailing list
> > Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
> > http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
> Bp_ipv6 mailing list
> Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Bp_ipv6