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

Re: Simplified NAT-PT



Hi Brian,

On 2008/02/08, at 7:06, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

Hello again,

On 2008-02-07 16:34, Hiroshi MIYATA wrote:
Thanks Brian for your comment.



On 2008/02/07, at 11:05, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

Miyata-san,

I haven't completely studied this yet, but I have two
quick comments.

 The prefix PREFIX::/96 is advertised in the IPv6 network by the
NAT-PT gateway, and packets addressed to this PREFIX will be routed
 to the NAT-PT gateway. The pre-configured PREFIX only needs to be
routable within the IPv6 network and as such it can be any routable
 prefix that the network administrator chooses.

This seems to assume that the NAT-PT is at the boundary between
a closed IPv6 routing realm (where it's OK to advertise a /96)
and the IPv4 network. What happens if someone needs to put
a NAT-PT between a closed IPv4 routing realm and the open
IPv6 network?

I think advertising /64 is enough.
Prefix for routing should be 64-bit.
And following 32-bit is indicator used by host to detect the translator.
Sorry, my description maybe confusable.

But you can't advertise a /64 to the Internet either...

Aggregated prefix is also fine.
If the packet arrived to the gateway, it works.
I think it is same as router who has stab network below.






The following 32-bit, represented as IDENT MUST be an value assigned
 by IANA to indicate that translator would exist in the path.
 More requirement for IDENT is described in Chapter 13.

Why is this useful?

IDENT can help end-node to know the existence of translator.
And it must be unique.
Then the end-node can have some options.
Put dialog to user, quit the session, search other address, etc...

I don't understand the value of these options. If you wanted the
upper layer protocol to calculate "correct" checksums, you could
play tricks with these "IDENT" bits to achieve that, I suppose.

Yes, above story supposes upper layer action. ;-)

Thanks,

....miyata




   Brian

If the end-node does not have function to detect the translator,
like existing implementation, it would connect to the address.

Regards,

...miyata




  Brian