Re: Access to the IPv4 net for IPv6-only systems, was: Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 28-sep-2007, at 22:57, Alain Durand wrote:

> Tunneling is great, but it requires to allocate an IPv4 address...  
> that I
> may not have in the first place.

If an IPv6-only box is going to talk to the IPv4 world, at some  
point, the traffic needs to hit a dual stack system that can do the  
IPv6/IPv4 translation.

I think an approach where you have a regular IPv4 NAT and then tunnel  
the RFC 1918 addresses over an IPv6-only network would work better  
than NAT-PT.

If the tunnel provisioning system is flexible enough, it could even  
give unNATed IPv4 addresses to (just) the hosts that need them,  
possibly only temporarily.