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

Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario

To: Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr>
Subject: Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:24:19 +0300
Cc: Alain Durand <alain_durand@cable.comcast.com>, IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <4857793F.6020808@free.fr>
References: <C47CE31D.12701%alain_durand@cable.comcast.com> <4857793F.6020808@free.fr>
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505)

Softwires is taking the solution that involves tunneling private-spacev4 over a v6-only cloud, and then doing a NAT towards the public v4Internet.

The rest should still be discussed in V6OPS. Are we done with theproblem statement, by the way? I would recommend completing it andshipping it as an RFC as soon as possible.

The actual protocol work (like Marcelo's draft on nat64, for instance)will happen elsewhere. The IESG is currently looking at recharteringBEHAVE WG to do this work.

Jari

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
  - From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>

References:
- Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
  - From: Alain Durand <alain_durand@cable.comcast.com>
- Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
  - From: Rémi Després <remi.despres@free.fr>

Prev by Date: I-D Action:draft-ietf-v6ops-addr-select-ps-09.txt
Next by Date: 464 scanarios - identifying the variety
Previous by thread: Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
Next by thread: Re: Tunnel-to-NAT scenario
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread