North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Transition Planning for IPv6 as mandated by the US Govt
Randy Bush wrote:
And the NAT-PT implementation at NANOG (naptd) did seem
For the size of a NANOG meeting, it seemed to be sufficient. I don't think I'd recommend trying to put thousands of users behind it though.
i suspect that all the nat-pt implementations are old and not well maintained. this needs to be fixed.
Still trying to understand deployment scenarios for nat-pt. I could see a case for very controlled environments with uniform clients (with robust v6 support). Outside of that, native-v6 + v4-nat (as outlined in Michael Sinatra's lightning talk) and Alain Durand's v4v6v4 seem more likely deployment candidates. That said, nat-pt is very useful for exercising native v6 support in clients and their applications.