[ipv6-wg] Follow up on RIPE67 IPv6 Only experiment
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Follow up on RIPE67 IPv6 Only experiment
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Follow up on RIPE67 IPv6 Only experiment
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Dan Wing
dwing at cisco.com
Fri Jan 10 10:05:55 CET 2014
On Jan 9, 2014, at 12:18 PM, Dan Luedtke <maildanrl at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Benedikt Stockebrand > <bs at stepladder-it.com> wrote: >> If I may offer one more suggestion, what about a "real" IPv6-only >> network without 464XLAT or anything, preferably as yet another SSID? I > NAT64/DNS64 works fine (until someone decides to validate DNS records) NAT64 works with host DNSSEC validation, provided that DNSSEC-validating host also does its own DNS64 function. The interaction of NAT64 with host DNSSEC validation is described in RFC6147. -d > >> This *will* break things, but that way we can see *what* breaks, so we >> can figure out what things need to be fixed. >> From my experience with NAT64 you only break protocols that are > already fundamentally broken :) > > > Best regards, > > Dan > > -- > Dan Luedtke > http://www.danrl.de >
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Follow up on RIPE67 IPv6 Only experiment
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Follow up on RIPE67 IPv6 Only experiment
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]