Subject: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-pb-statement-req-00 - who from the v6 sidecan talk to who in the v4 side?

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:15:55 +0200

Hi,

In the current version of the draft we have that:

R2: Basic communication support
R2.1: Translation mechanism must support v6-initiated short-lived local 
handle (as defined in Section 3.1.

There is strong consensus on this

Question: v6-initiated connections from which v6 address to which v4 
address?
I have always assumed all v6 address and all v4 addresses, but after 
some discussion, it is not obvious…

Do people think that this goal is achieved is a subset of v6 source 
address can reach a subset of v4 addresses? Or do people think that this 
goal is achieved if a subset of v6 addresses can reach all the v4 addresses?

Regards, marcelo

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 04:29:38 +1200

Regards
   Brian Carpenter
   University of Auckland

> goal is achieved if a subset of v6 addresses can reach all the v4

In my view, neither is OK for a general solution. There may be communities
that can manage with a subset, but I don't see how it can solve the
residual general problem of coexistence (i.e. the part that isn't solved
by the dual stack model).

   Brian