Re: on NAT-PT

[itojun@iijlab.net]

>>>    To minimize the problems associated with NAPT-PT, the following=20
>>>    actions are recommended: =20
>>>         1. Separate the DNS ALG from the NAPT-PT node.=20
>>	(1) is not correct.  NAT-PT RFC does not specify where to place =
>>DNS-ALG.
>>	DNS-ALG and NAT-PT translation part can reside on different boxes.
>>	when there's only one IPv4 address available to the site, there's no
>>	other choice than to collocate DNS-ALG and the translation part.
>>	(RFC2766 seems to talk about this situation only, which might be
>>	the source of the confusion)
>JW: OK... What would be your (text) suggestion; forgetting this
>recommendation? Alain D. commented in his mail that the DNS-ALG part in
>the "v6 to v4" case needs to removed from the NAT-PT document.

	depends on what do you really mean by "separate".  if you mean that
	DNS-ALG functionality has to reside onto separate box from NAT-PT
	translation functionality, it is already part of NAT-PT spec (so
	you can drop this bullet).

	it looks that you mean something else, like avoiding the use of
	DNS-ALG from NAT-PT (= alter NAT-PT spec).  i don't see real technical
	ground for that.

itojun