[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Merge NAT-PT approaches?
Hi Brian (and others),
The NAT-PT discussion pretty much stopped after the v6ops session two
weeks ago. So let me kick it in gear again:
I think it would be useful to merge our approaches. Mine has the
benefit that the changes are minimal on the host side and changes on
the NAT-PT box side are probably unnecessary for a large subset of all
possible communications. Your approach has the advantage that it can
provide a complete solution for pretty much every type of
communication, including a decent chunk that probably can't even be
supported by IPv4 NAT.
So what I'm thinking is that we come up with something where hosts do
A record lookups but otherwise use NAT-PT pretty much the way it is
today. I've had some private feedback on anycast, so I'm thinking the
top 96 bits would come from either direct manual configuration or they
are obtained from a magic DNS name in the domain that the host has
learned through manual configuration or DHCP.
The shim approach would then kick in when the host needs to do more
advanced communication, for instance, when it needs to know or set the
source address / source port, it needs incoming connections or when
there needs to be authentication from the host towards the NAT-PT
gateway.
We probably want to define some API that applications can use to
invoke the above but also IPv6 firewall traversal for regular IPv6
connectivity. (Unless there already is an API we can reuse?)
Iljitsch