From: Danny Cox (dandermanuk@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Feb 18 2007 - 17:09:43 ART
That was useful, thanks. I get the concept of this now, but it does
highlight something.
Let's return to :
R1 ------- R2 ---------- R3
R1 is ipv4 only, and R3 ipv6 only with the NAT-PT box being R2. R2
translates R3's ipv6 address into an ipv4 address, for packets
heading towards R1, and R1's ipv4 address into an ipv6 address to
reach R3. That's fine if the ipv6 address which is used to translate
R1's ipv4 address is in a different network to the R2-R3 network, but
how would we persuade R2 to answer on behalf of R1 as though R1 were
on that same nework? Is this possible? The more I think about it,
the more awkward it seems.
Similarly for the other way around .. can we have R3's translated ipv4
address be in the same range as the R1-R2 network?
cheers
Danny
On 17/02/07, Bob Sinclair <bob@bobsinclair.net> wrote:
> Danny Cox wrote:
> > Thanks Bob - that's interesting. How do you handle the ipv6 side ?
> > Have you been able to get the pings to work from the ipv6 stub?
> >
> > cheers
> > Danny
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
> Hi Danny,
>
> On the V6-only router, make sure you have a route to the virtual
> prefix. The virtual prefix will show up as a Connected route on the
> NAT router. If you are running a V6 routing protocol on it, then you
> could do redistribute connected.
>
> --
> HtH,
>
> Bob Sinclair CCIE 10427 CCSI 30427
> www.netmasterclass.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 01 2007 - 07:38:47 ART