[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: I-D Action:draft-van-beijnum-modified-nat-pt-02.txt



On 3 dec 2007, at 14:39, Brian Dickson wrote:

Do IPv4-to-IPv6 protocol translation - but now, the extra "twist" - embed the *port* in the IPv6 destination, *above* the IPv4 address. This lets us set up "generic" ALGs, based on covering aggregates for the "special" address space we use for the place where 6-back-to-4 happens. And, we can then set up ALGs on a per-port basis, which are more- specific addresses.

When I read this it wasn't obvious to me what you meant, but being able to talk in person can sometimes be helpful. :-)

The idea is to have a format like ::port:v4:addr which makes it possible to route all traffic for a given destination port to a separate translator that is better prepared to translate the protocol in question. This is a good trick!

There are even a few advanced tricks that can be accomplished, like reverse-port-mapping to request inbound port(s) and possibly inbound port+IPv4 address "reservation". Combined with dynamic DNS, it may be possible to extend the usefulness of a very small number of IPv4 addresses, to support a much larger of "servers" who need reserved ports, although possibly only intermittently. (Think SMTP for hosting, inbound with MX and relay.)

Right, there are services that need a more or less permanent inbound capability and others that only need this at certain times. I'd say that SMTP is an example of the former, though. The latter would be things like peer-to-peer applications that only run once in a while, such as videoconferencing.

The implementation of things like DHCP (for IPv4) use well-know IPv4 "broadcast" address destination 255.255.255.255. But, having an IPv6 host listen on that address, transmogrified by the mapping including port, means a specific IPv6 address can act as a DHCP server (or relay).

Is this useful?

Oh, yeah, one other good thing - there is no requirement that the ALGs or NAT-PT exist on the same network, just that they be reachable via IPv6 natively. So, a small network could point their "ALG default" at an upstream, who then would handle all the NAT-PT stuff (presumably as either a value-add, paid, or bundled service) for access to the V4 Internet.

Indeed.