Re: terminology proposal: NAT+PT (or NAT64 ?)

[Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>]

Rémi Després wrote:
> Keith Moore wrote :
> > one use case for v4 NATs is mapping between two networks using the
> same range of RFC 1918 addresses.  in those cases addresses get
> substituted in both directions.
>
> Substitution of both addresses seems strange to me, at least in the
> context of IETF, but I am interested in learning aboiut it.
> Would you have a reference where this usage is documented?
I've never seen anything published about it, I've only heard of it
actually being used.  Of course, it's not "in the context of IETF" as
the people who use such setups are interested in solving their immediate
problems rather than in what makes sense for the whole Internet.
> In any case, this is different from the NAT-64 case.
I don't know what you mean by NAT-64, but be assured that translations
between v4 and v6 necessarily involve address substitution in both
directions.
> The IPv6 prefix to be used, when an IPv4 source address has to be
> converted into an IPv6 address, is the mapped addres prefix ::FFFF/36.
that's simply not acceptable.

Keith