RE: IPv4 to IPv6 transition

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

 



Title: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition
Future applications are the easiest to deal with.
 
If we have a proper encapsulation of the network layer the application will run fine on either an IPv6 or an IPv4/NAT network or a transitional IPv6 plus NAT pool of IPv4 addresses. The only thing that the application designer needs to take care of is that they use an appropriately structured API that can handle 32/128 bit address issues. This is no different in principle from what is involved in writing clean 32/64 code.
 
 


From: Keith Moore [mailto:moore@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Fri 13/07/2007 3:27 PM
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
Cc: Stephen Sprunk; Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino; Paul Hoffman; ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: IPv4 to IPv6 transition


> Most application protocols work just fine behind NAT. FTP works with
> an ugly work-around. The main protocol that breaks down is SIP.
>

there are a couple of problems with this analysis:

one is that it considers only application protocols that are in
widespread use.  there are lots of applications that are used by limited
communities that are nevertheless important.  and of course, since NATs
are so pervasive, most of the applications that are in widespread use
have been made to work with NAT (often at tremendous expense, and
reduced reliability).

another problem is that it only considers current applications.  a big
part of the problem with NAT is that it inhibits the
development/deployment of useful new applications.

Keith

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]