Hurricane Electric's IPv6 Tunnel Broker Forums

Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to Hurricane Electric's Tunnelbroker.net forums!

Author Topic: NAT64/DS-Lite  (Read 6362 times)

atopal

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
NAT64/DS-Lite
« on: February 08, 2011, 06:45:34 PM »

Perhaps there would be some way of testing a users ability to configure or understand concepts of NAT64 and DS-Lite. When I first started messing around with them it was a pita but these protocols seem like they are going to play a major role in the IPv4 to IPv6 transition in the United States at least initially.
Logged

nboullis

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 10
    • View Profile
Re: NAT64/DS-Lite
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2011, 02:35:22 AM »

As far as I am concerned, I did not know about DS-Lite, so I just read about it (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/46600 if someone is interested) and it looks like a great system.
As you seem to have some experience with it, do you know systems that implement DS-Lite for the provider-side of the problem?

As for a DS-Lite test, the client-side of DS-Lite would be pretty trivial (a simple IPv4 in IPv6 ensapsulation), wouldn't it?
Or would you like to test the people's ability to set-up a DS-Lite router? I don't think it would be a good test as it would require IPv4 connectivity, and it would be somewhat complex to check that it really makes the difference between packets originating for the same RFC1918 IPv4 address but from different IPv6 addresses.

Anyway, thanks for pointing DS-Lite.
Logged

jimb

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • ^^^ Warped picture
    • View Profile
Re: NAT64/DS-Lite
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2011, 12:19:04 PM »

DS-Lite isn't really well supported yet AFAIK.  Last time I looked there was one special build of OpenWRT or DD-WRT (can't remember) which included it.  Not sure if here are other clients now.  Also not sure about the support in the CGN devices which will support it.

DS-Lite is kind of cool 'cause it allows overlapping RFC1918s on the CGN/LSN, which I think is a cool feature.  The main knock on it I've heard is that it's more resource and memory intensive than say NAT64 because every client requires a IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnel.

If anyone is likely to adopt it on a wide scale, I think it will be Comcast, since they were behind it (one of their engineers designed it IIRC).  It's left to be seen whether it'll take off or not.  I don't think CC has started trials with DS-Lite yet.  They've been mostly focusing on 6RD and 6to4.  Now they're about to start up on NDS.  I guess they wanted to trial IPv6 access before they trialed IPv4 access over IPv6. 
Logged