nanog mailing list archives

Re: quietly....


From: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 16:36:20 -0500


On Feb 4, 2011, at 4:32 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:


In message <201102041140.42719.lowen () pari edu>, Lamar Owen writes:
On Friday, February 04, 2011 09:05:09 am Derek J. Balling wrote:
I think they'll eventually notice a difference. How will an IPv4-only inter
nal host know what to do with an IPv6 AAAA record it gets from a DNS lookup?

If the CPE is doing DNS proxy (most do) then it can map the AAAA record to an
A record it passes to the internal client, with an internal address for the 
record chosen from RFC1918 space, and perform IPv4-IPv6 1:1 NAT from the assi
gned RFC1918 address to the external IPv6 address from the AAAA record (since
you have at least a /64 at your CPE, you can even use the RFC1918 address in
the lower 32 bits.... :-P).  

This may already be a standard, or a draft, or implemented somewhere; I don't
know.  But that is how I would do it, just thinking off the top of my head.


DS-lite delivers a IPv4 softwire over a IPv6 upstream.  It also
introduces less problems than NAT64 as it works with DNSSEC and
with IPv4 literal.  Along with DS-lite there is a UPNP replacement
designed to work with distributed NATs (DS-Lite (AFTR+B4) and NAT444
(LSN + CPE NAT)) so that holes can be punched threw multiple devices
if needed.

I've yet to see a version of ALG that isn't buggy (eg: Cisco SIP-ALG, 2Wire/ATT uverse sip-alg is seriously broken, 
same for either dlink or netgear... we have to turn it off otherwise it does bad things).

I'm sure that LSN activity is going to work "great" for the carriers.

*shakes head*

- jared

Current thread: