Hi, Petra, Thank you for the detailed answer on a use case.
More questions or comments below. Le 30 oct. 2010 à 19:28, S.P.Zeidler a écrit : > Site A: > /-- FWE-A1 -- Provider A1 > Internal -- FWI-A -- DMZ -- FWE-A2 -- Provider A2 > | \-- FWE-A3 -- Provider A3 > | > Site B: > | > Internal -- FWI-B -- DMZ -- FWE-B1 -- Provider B1 > \-- FWE-B2 -- Provider B2 > ... > The DMZs are not flat, and use both private and public addresses. Do you mean with the three public address spaces A1, A2, A4, in the first DMZ? If the DMZ uses private addresses, are they the same as in the internal space? > ... > Rerouting will break all previous connections for the route that gets > changed. I see. This is rather permissive, but is a possible choice. > Using PI and an AS would be technically simple and even prevent breaking > of connections, but would cost significantly more. Agreed. We are all looking for solutions needing no PIs. > ... > > Cost considerations will likely make us use translation whether it's > standardized or not. This, in my understanding, holds for stateless NAT66 as well as for algorithmic NAT66. Right? > Currently available translation is stateful, which is > more interference with the packets than needed here. The algorithmic translation does 1's complement arithmetic on variable part of addresses, which has complex consequences. Resulting restrictions on values to be used in subnet numbering are, in my understanding, still uncertain. Yet, I agree that, if some vendors can make clear they have customers that, after looking at all alternatives (including those without any NAT66), do prefer to use algorithmic NAT66, then having an IETF documented specification for this NAT66 variant should be useful. I also agree that, for these customers to make their decisions, a "proposal" for an algorithmic NAT66 specification makes sense. That's why I take time to discuss technical properties of the mrw-nat66 proposal. Regards, RD _______________________________________________ nat66 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nat66
