On Sep 27, 2011, at 3:15 PM, Manfredi, Albert E wrote: > Doesn't seem logical to conclude that a NAT would be involved in any of this. > But even if it is, what's wrong with a "basic NAT," i.e. one that provides a > simple one to one mapping for a subset of the internal addresses?
If you do need to do address translation for this purpose, I'd suggest using NPTv6 (described in RFC 6296). It provides a one-to-one, algorithmic, checksum neutral mapping which avoids some problems caused by NATs. Margaret -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
