Rémi,I think that you are correct. The BIW draft describes a reinvention, or specialization, of NAT-PT. A BIW translator is a NAT-PT that is dedicated to serving a single IPv4-only host. In this restricted role, there are differences between a BIW translator and an RFC2766 NAT-PT. These differences are in the details, however. It is still doing address and protocol translation.
Here are two major differences between a BIW translator and an RFC2766 NAT-PT:A BIW translator uses private IPv4 addresses to represent IPv6-only hosts. As a result, IPv4/IPv6 address bindings can persist indefinitely, since there's no rush to reclaim a global IPv4 address for another host to use.
A BIW translator serves as the host's proxy on a dual IPv4/IPv6 network, so it needs to pass some IPv4 packets from the host to the network side without protocol translation. It must also participate in SLAAC and DHCP on the host's behalf.
Paul At 03:35 PM 10/9/2006, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
Le lundi 9 octobre 2006 22:08, vous avez écrit : > Here is a follow up to my previous mail the with Bump in the Wire > draft as an attachment. I ony read the document ?diagonaly?, and I might actually have gotten it wrong, but I have a feeling this is a reinvention of NAT-PT. Could you explain how does this new mechanism compare to the latter? -- Rémi Denis-Courmont http://www.remlab.net/