Re: 6to4 vs forwarding IP proto41 in NAT

[HELENA RUTE SOFIA <rsofia@seas.upenn.edu>]

One thing that is really puzzling me about this draft is: do we really
need this?? There are currently two options that have "more" priority in
terms of implementation, i.e., v6 and 6to4...so why try to create a
document on something that is currently assumed to work, and that is only
used as a "hack", when one of the other two is not working?? Why do we
need a document on this?

Rute


On Tue, 15 Jul 2003, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

> Agree, it should work.
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>
> To: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 5:01 PM
> Subject: 6to4 vs forwarding IP proto41 in NAT
>
>
> > A NAT box could do the following when receiving an IPv6 packet
> > encapsulated in IPv4 with proto 41:
> >
> > If IPv6 dst does not belong to the local 6to4 /48 prefix, forward
> > internally,
> > else decapsulate.
> >
> > Why will will not work?
> >
> > - Alain.
> >
>
> *****************************
> Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
> Presentations and videos on-line at:
> http://www.ipv6-es.com
>
>
>