[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: (draft-mawatari-v6ops-464xlat) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 RFC 6877

Internet Engineering Task Force                              M. Mawatari
Internet-Draft                          Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.
Intended status: BCP                                        M. Kawashima
Expires: March 22, 2013                         NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.
                                                                C. Byrne
                                                            T-Mobile USA
                                                      September 18, 2012


       464XLAT: Combination of Stateful and Stateless Translation
                      draft-ietf-v6ops-464xlat-08

Abstract

   This document describes an architecture (464XLAT) for providing
   limited IPv4 connectivity across an IPv6-only network by combining
   existing and well-known stateful protocol translation RFC 6146 in the
   core and stateless protocol translation RFC 6145 at the edge. 464XLAT
   is a simple and scalable technique to quickly deploy limited IPv4
   access service to IPv6-only edge networks without encapsulation.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on March 22, 2013.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect



Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  BCP Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Requirements Language  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   5.  Motivation and Uniqueness of 464XLAT . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   6.  Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     6.1.  Wireline Network Architecture  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     6.2.  Wireless 3GPP Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   7.  Applicability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     7.1.  Wireline Network Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     7.2.  Wireless 3GPP Network Applicability  . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   8.  Implementation Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     8.1.  IPv6 Address Format  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     8.2.  IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation Chart  . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     8.3.  IPv6 Prefix Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.4.  DNS Proxy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.5.  CLAT in a Gateway  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     8.6.  CLAT to CLAT communications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   9.  Deployment Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
     9.1.  Traffic Engineering  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     9.2.  Traffic Treatment Scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   10. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   11. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   12. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   Appendix A.  Examples of IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation . . . . . . 12
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13














Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


1.  Introduction

   With the exhaustion of the unallocated IPv4 address pools, it will be
   difficult for many networks to assign IPv4 addresses to end users.

   This document describes an IPv4 over IPv6 solution as one of the
   techniques for IPv4 service extension and encouragement of IPv6
   deployment. 464XLAT is not a one-for-one replacement of full IPv4
   functionality.  The 464XLAT architecture only supports IPv4 in the
   client server model, where the server has a global IPv4 address.
   This means it is not fit for IPv4 peer-to-peer communication or
   inbound IPv4 connections. 464XLAT builds on IPv6 transport and
   includes full any-to-any IPv6 communication.

   The 464XLAT architecture described in this document uses IPv4/IPv6
   translation standardized in [RFC6145] and [RFC6146].  It does not
   require DNS64 [RFC6147] since an IPv4 host may simply send IPv4
   packets, including packets to an IPv4 DNS server, which will be
   translated on the customer side translator(CLAT) to IPv6 and back to
   IPv4 on the provider side translator(PLAT). 464XLAT networks may use
   DNS64 [RFC6147] to enable single stateful translation [RFC6146]
   instead of 464XLAT double translation where possible.  The 464XLAT
   architecture encourages the IPv6 transition by making IPv4 services
   reachable across IPv6-only networks and providing IPv6 and IPv4
   connectivity to single-stack IPv4 or IPv6 servers and peers.


2.  BCP Scenario

   This BCP only applies when the following two criteria are present:

   1.  There is an IPv6-only network that uses stateful translation
       [RFC6146] as the only mechanism for providing IPv4 access.

   2.  There are IPv4-only applications or hosts that must communicate
       across the IPv6-only network to reach the IPv4 Internet.


3.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].


4.  Terminology





Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


   PLAT:   PLAT is Provider side translator(XLAT) that complies with
           [RFC6146].  It translates N:1 global IPv6 addresses to global
           IPv4 addresses, and vice versa.

   CLAT:   CLAT is Customer side translator(XLAT) that complies with
           [RFC6145].  It algorithmically translates 1:1 private IPv4
           addresses to global IPv6 addresses, and vice versa.  The CLAT
           function is applicable to a router or an end-node such as a
           mobile phone.  The CLAT SHOULD perform router function to
           facilitate packets forwarding through the stateless
           translation even if it is an end-node.  The CLAT as a common
           home router or wireless 3GPP router is expected to perform
           gateway functions such as DHCP server and DNS proxy for local
           clients.  The CLAT does not comply with the sentence "Both
           IPv4-translatable IPv6 addresses and IPv4-converted IPv6
           addresses SHOULD use the same prefix." that is described on
           Section 3.3 in [RFC6052] due to using different IPv6 prefixes
           for CLAT-side and PLAT-side IPv4 addresses.


5.  Motivation and Uniqueness of 464XLAT

   1.  Minimal IPv4 resource requirements, maximum IPv4 efficiency
       through statistical multiplexing.

   2.  No new protocols required, quick deployment.

   3.  IPv6-only networks are simpler and therefore less expensive to
       operate.


6.  Network Architecture

   Examples of 464XLAT architectures are shown in the figures in the
   following sections.

   Wireline Network Architecture can fit in the situations where there
   are clients behind the CLAT in the same way regardless of the type of
   access service, for example FTTH, DOCSIS, or WiFi.

   Wireless 3GPP Network Architecture fits in the situations where a
   client terminates the wireless access network and may act as a router
   with tethered clients.

6.1.  Wireline Network Architecture

   The private IPv4 host on this diagram can reach global IPv4 hosts via
   translation on both CLAT and PLAT.  On the other hand, the IPv6 host



Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


   can reach other IPv6 hosts on the Internet directly without
   translation.  This means that the CPE/CLAT can not only have the
   function of a CLAT but also the function of an IPv6 native router for
   native IPv6 traffic.  The v4p host behind the CLAT on this diagram
   has [RFC1918] addresses.


                                 +------+
                                 |  v6  |
                                 | host |
                                 +--+---+
                                    |
                                .---+---.
                               /         \
                              /   IPv6    \
                             |  Internet   |
                              \           /
                               `----+----'
                                    |
   +------+   |                 .---+---.                    .------.
   |  v6  +---+   +------+     /         \     +------+     /        \
   | host |   |   |      |    /   IPv6    \    |      |    /   IPv4   \
   +------+   +---+ CLAT +---+   Network   +---+ PLAT +---+  Internet  |
   +--------+ |   |      |    \           /    |      |    \           /
   | v4p/v6 +-+   +------+     `---------'     +------+     `----+----'
   |  host  | |                                                  |
   +--------+ |                                               +--+---+
   +------+   |                                               | v4g  |
   | v4p  +---+                                               | host |
   | host |   |                                               +------+
   +------+   |

          <- v4p -> XLAT <--------- v6 --------> XLAT <- v4g ->

     v6  : Global IPv6
     v4p : Private IPv4
     v4g : Global IPv4

                    Figure 1: Wireline Network Topology

6.2.  Wireless 3GPP Network Architecture

   The CLAT function on the User Equipment (UE) provides an [RFC1918]
   address and IPv4 default route to the local node network stack.  The
   applications on the UE can use the private IPv4 address for reaching
   global IPv4 hosts via translation on both the CLAT and the PLAT.  On
   the other hand, reaching IPv6 hosts (including host presented via
   DNS64 [RFC6147]) does not require the CLAT function on the UE.



Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


   Presenting a private IPv4 network for tethering via NAT44 and
   stateless translation on the UE is also an application of the CLAT.


                                  +------+
                                  |  v6  |
                                  | host |
                                  +--+---+
                                     |
                                 .---+---.
                                /         \
                               /   IPv6    \
                              |   Internet  |
                               \           /
      UE / Mobile Phone         `---------'
   +----------------------+          |
   | +----+    |          |      .---+---.                   .------.
   | | v6 +----+   +------+     /         \     +------+    /        \
   | +----+    |   |      |    / IPv6 PDP  \    |      |   /   IPv4   \
   |           +---+ CLAT +---+ Mobile Core +---+ PLAT +--+  Internet  |
   |           |   |      |    \    GGSN   /    |      |   \          /
   |           |   +------+     \         '     +------+    `----+---'
   | +-----+   |          |      `-------'                       |
   | | v4p +---+          |                                   +--+---+
   | +-----+   |          |                                   | v4g  |
   +----------------------+                                   | host |
                                                              +------+

           <- v4p -> XLAT <--------- v6 --------> XLAT <- v4g ->

     v6  : Global IPv6
     v4p : Private IPv4
     v4g : Global IPv4



                 Figure 2: Wireless 3GPP Network Topology


7.  Applicability

7.1.  Wireline Network Applicability

   When an ISP has IPv6 access service and provides 464XLAT, the ISP can
   provide outgoing IPv4 service to end users across an IPv6 access
   network.  The result is that edge network growth is no longer tightly
   coupled to the availability of scarce IPv4 addresses.




Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


   If another ISP operates the PLAT, the edge ISP is only required to
   deploy an IPv6 access network.  All ISPs do not need IPv4 access
   networks.  They can migrate their access network to a simple and
   highly scalable IPv6-only environment.

7.2.  Wireless 3GPP Network Applicability

   At the time of writing, in September 2012, the vast majority of
   mobile networks are compliant to Pre-Release 9 3GPP standards.  In
   Pre-Release 9 3GPP networks, GSM and UMTS networks must signal and
   support both IPv4 and IPv6 Packet Data Protocol (PDP) attachments to
   access IPv4 and IPv6 network destinations [RFC6459].  Since there are
   two PDPs required to support two address families, this is double the
   number of PDPs required to support the status quo of one address
   family, which is IPv4.

   For the cases of connecting to an IPv4 literal or IPv4 socket that
   require IPv4 connectivity, the CLAT function on the UE provides a
   private IPv4 address and IPv4 default route on the host for the
   applications to reference and bind to.  Connections sourced from the
   IPv4 interface are immediately routed to the CLAT function and passed
   to the IPv6-only mobile network, destined for the PLAT.  In summary,
   the UE has the CLAT function that does a stateless translation
   [RFC6145], but only when required by an IPv4-only scenario such as
   IPv4 literals or IPv4-only sockets.  The mobile network has a PLAT
   that does stateful translation [RFC6146].

   464XLAT works with today's existing systems as much as possible.
   464XLAT is compatible with existing network based deep packet
   inspection solutions like 3GPP standardized Policy and Charging
   Control (PCC) [TS.23203].


8.  Implementation Considerations

8.1.  IPv6 Address Format

   The IPv6 address format in 464XLAT is defined in Section 2.2 of
   [RFC6052].

8.2.  IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation Chart

   This chart offers a explanation about address translation
   architecture using combination of stateful translation at the PLAT
   and stateless translation at the CLAT.  The client on this chart is
   delegated IPv6 prefix from a prefix delegation mechanism such as
   DHCPv6-PD [RFC3633], therefore it has a dedicated IPv6 prefix for
   translation.



Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


                                           Destination IPv4 address
                                          +----------------------------+
                                          | Global IPv4 address        |
                                          | assigned to IPv4 server    |
                               +--------+ +----------------------------+
                               |  IPv4  |  Source IPv4 address
                               | server | +----------------------------+
                               +--------+ | Global IPv4 address        |
                                   ^      | assigned to IPv4 PLAT pool |
                                   |      +----------------------------+
                               +--------+
                               |  PLAT  | Stateful XLATE(IPv4:IPv6=1:n)
                               +--------+
                                   ^
                                   |
                              (IPv6 cloud)
         Destination IPv6 address
        +--------------------------------------------------------------+
        | IPv4-Embedded IPv6 address                                   |
        | defined in Section 2.2 of RFC6052                            |
        +--------------------------------------------------------------+
         Source IPv6 address
        +--------------------------------------------------------------+
        | IPv4-Embedded IPv6 address                                   |
        | defined in Section 2.2 of RFC6052                            |
        +--------------------------------------------------------------+
                              (IPv6 cloud)
                                   ^
                                   |
                               +--------+
                               |  CLAT  | Stateless XLATE(IPv4:IPv6=1:1)
                               +--------+
                                   ^       Destination IPv4 address
                                   |      +----------------------------+
                               +--------+ | Global IPv4 address        |
                               |  IPv4  | | assigned to IPv4 server    |
                               | client | +----------------------------+
                               +--------+  Source IPv4 address
                                          +----------------------------+
                                          | Private IPv4 address       |
                                          | assigned to IPv4 client    |
                                          +----------------------------+

               Case of enabling only stateless XLATE on CLAT







Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


8.3.  IPv6 Prefix Handling

   The CLAT SHOULD acquire a dedicated /64 prefix for the purpose of
   sending and receiving statelessly translated packets.

   The CLAT MAY discover the PLAT-side translation IPv6 prefix used as a
   destination of the PLAT via
   [I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic].  In the future some
   other mechanisms, such as a new DHCPv6 option, will possibly be
   defined.

   When a dedicated /64 prefix is not available from DHCPv6-PD
   [RFC3633], the CLAT MAY perform NAT44 for all IPv4 LAN packets so
   that all the LAN originated IPv4 packets appear from a single IPv4
   address and are then statelessly translated to one IPv6 address that
   is claimed by the CLAT via NDP and defended with DAD.

8.4.  DNS Proxy Implementation

   The CLAT SHOULD implement a DNS proxy as defined in [RFC5625].  The
   case of an IPv4-only node behind the CLAT querying an IPv4 DNS server
   is undesirable since it requires both stateful and stateless
   translation for each DNS lookup.  The CLAT SHOULD set itself as the
   DNS server via DHCP or other means and proxy DNS queries for IPv4 and
   IPv6 LAN clients.  Using the CLAT enabled home router or UE as a DNS
   proxy is a normal consumer gateway function and simplifies the
   traffic flow so that only IPv6 native queries are made across the
   access network.  The CLAT SHOULD allow for a client to query any DNS
   server of its choice and bypass the proxy.

8.5.  CLAT in a Gateway

   The CLAT is a stateless translation feature which can be implemented
   in a common home router or mobile phone that has a tethering feature.
   The router with CLAT function SHOULD provide common router services
   such as DHCP of [RFC1918] addresses, DHCPv6, and DNS service.

8.6.  CLAT to CLAT communications

   While CLAT to CLAT IPv4 communication may work when the client IPv4
   subnets do not overlap, this traffic flow is out of scope. 464XLAT is
   a hub and spoke architecture focused on enabling IPv4-only services
   over IPv6-only networks.


9.  Deployment Considerations





Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


9.1.  Traffic Engineering

   Even if the ISP for end users is different from the PLAT provider
   (e.g. another ISP), it can implement traffic engineering
   independently from the PLAT provider.  Detailed reasons are below:

   1.  The ISP for end users can figure out IPv4 destination address
       from translated IPv6 packet header, so it can implement traffic
       engineering based on IPv4 destination address (e.g. traffic
       monitoring for each IPv4 destination address, packet filtering
       for each IPv4 destination address, etc.).  The tunneling methods
       do not have such an advantage, without any deep packet inspection
       for processing the inner IPv4 packet of the tunnel packet.

   2.  If the ISP for end users can assign an IPv6 prefix greater than
       /64 to each subscriber, this 464XLAT architecture can separate
       IPv6 prefix for native IPv6 packets and the XLAT prefixes for
       IPv4/IPv6 translation packets.  Accordingly, it can identify the
       type of packets ("native IPv6 packets" and "IPv4/IPv6 translation
       packets"), and implement traffic engineering based on the IPv6
       prefix.

9.2.  Traffic Treatment Scenarios

   The below table outlines how different permutations of connectivity
   are treated in the 464XLAT architecture.

   NOTE: 464XLAT double translation treatment will be stateless when a
   dedicated /64 is available for translation on the CLAT.  Otherwise,
   the CLAT will have both stateful and stateless since it requires
   NAT44 from the LAN to a single IPv4 address and then stateless
   translation to a single IPv6 address.


        +--------+-------------+-----------------------+-------------+
        | Server | Application |   Traffic Treatment   | Location of |
        |        | and Host    |                       | Translation |
        +--------+-------------+-----------------------+-------------+
        |  IPv6  |    IPv6     |    End-to-end IPv6    |    None     |
        +--------+-------------+-----------------------+-------------+
        |  IPv4  |    IPv6     | Stateful Translation  |    PLAT     |
        +--------+-------------+-----------------------+-------------+
        |  IPv4  |    IPv4     |        464XLAT        |  PLAT/CLAT  |
        +--------+-------------+-----------------------+-------------+

                        Traffic Treatment Scenarios





Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


10.  Security Considerations

   To implement a PLAT, see security considerations presented in Section
   5 of [RFC6146].

   To implement a CLAT, see security considerations presented in Section
   7 of [RFC6145].  The CLAT MAY comply with [RFC6092].


11.  IANA Considerations

   This document has no actions for IANA.


12.  Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank JPIX NOC members, JPIX 464XLAT trial
   service members, Seiichi Kawamura, Dan Drown, Brian Carpenter, Rajiv
   Asati, Washam Fan, Behcet Sarikaya, Jan Zorz, Tatsuya Oishi, Lorenzo
   Colitti, Erik Kline, Ole Troan, Maoke Chen, Gang Chen, Tom Petch,
   Jouni Korhonen, Bjoern A. Zeeb, Hemant Singh, Vizdal Ales, Mark ZZZ
   Smith, Mikael Abrahamsson, Tore Anderson, Teemu Savolainen, Alexandru
   Petrescu, Gert Doering, Victor Kuarsingh, Ray Hunter, James Woodyatt,
   and Tom Taylor for their helpful comments.  Special acknowledgments
   go to Remi Despres for his plentiful supports and suggestions,
   especially about using NAT44 with IANA's EUI-64 ID.  We also would
   like to thank Fred Baker and Joel Jaeggli for their support.


13.  References

13.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC6052]  Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.
              Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052,
              October 2010.

   [RFC6145]  Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation
              Algorithm", RFC 6145, April 2011.

   [RFC6146]  Bagnulo, M., Matthews, P., and I. van Beijnum, "Stateful
              NAT64: Network Address and Protocol Translation from IPv6
              Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6146, April 2011.





Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


13.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic]
              Savolainen, T., Korhonen, J., and D. Wing, "Discovery of
              IPv6 Prefix Used for IPv6 Address Synthesis",
              draft-ietf-behave-nat64-discovery-heuristic-11 (work in
              progress), July 2012.

   [RFC1918]  Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
              E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
              BCP 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.

   [RFC3633]  Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
              Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
              December 2003.

   [RFC5625]  Bellis, R., "DNS Proxy Implementation Guidelines",
              BCP 152, RFC 5625, August 2009.

   [RFC6092]  Woodyatt, J., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in
              Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing
              Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092,
              January 2011.

   [RFC6147]  Bagnulo, M., Sullivan, A., Matthews, P., and I. van
              Beijnum, "DNS64: DNS Extensions for Network Address
              Translation from IPv6 Clients to IPv4 Servers", RFC 6147,
              April 2011.

   [RFC6459]  Korhonen, J., Soininen, J., Patil, B., Savolainen, T.,
              Bajko, G., and K. Iisakkila, "IPv6 in 3rd Generation
              Partnership Project (3GPP) Evolved Packet System (EPS)",
              RFC 6459, January 2012.

   [TS.23203] 3GPP, "Policy and charging control architecture", 3GPP
              TS 23.203 10.7.0, June 2012.



Appendix A.  Examples of IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation

   The following is a example of IPv4/IPv6 Address Translation on the
   464XLAT architecture.

   In the case that an IPv6 prefix greater than /64 is assigned to an
   end user by such as DHCPv6-PD [RFC3633], the CLAT can use a dedicated
   /64 from the assigned IPv6 prefix.




Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


      Host & configuration value
   +------------------------------+
   |           IPv4 server        |
   |         [198.51.100.1]       |            IP packet header
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
                   ^                  | Destination IP address         |
                   |                  | [198.51.100.1]                 |
                   |                  | Source IP address              |
                   |                  | [192.0.2.1]                    |
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
   |              PLAT            |                   ^
   | IPv4 pool address            |                   |
   | [192.0.2.1 - 192.0.2.100]    |                   |
   | PLAT-side XLATE IPv6 prefix  |                   |
   | [2001:db8:1234::/96]         |                   |
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
                   ^                  | Destination IP address         |
                   |                  | [2001:db8:1234::198.51.100.1]  |
                   |                  | Source IP address              |
                   |                  | [2001:db8:aaaa::192.168.1.2]   |
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
   |              CLAT            |                   ^
   | PLAT-side XLATE IPv6 prefix  |                   |
   | [2001:db8:1234::/96]         |                   |
   | CLAT-side XLATE IPv6 prefix  |                   |
   | [2001:db8:aaaa::/96]         |                   |
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
                   ^                  | Destination IP address         |
                   |                  | [198.51.100.1]                 |
                   |                  | Source IP address              |
                   |                  | [192.168.1.2]                  |
   +------------------------------+   +--------------------------------+
   |          IPv4 client         |
   |        [192.168.1.2/24]      |
   +------------------------------+
   Delegated IPv6 prefix for client: 2001:db8:aaaa::/56















Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft                   464XLAT                  September 2012


Authors' Addresses

   Masataka Mawatari
   Japan Internet Exchange Co.,Ltd.
   KDDI Otemachi Building 19F, 1-8-1 Otemachi,
   Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo  100-0004
   JAPAN

   Phone: +81 3 3243 9579
   Email: mawatari@jpix.ad.jp


   Masanobu Kawashima
   NEC AccessTechnica, Ltd.
   800, Shimomata
   Kakegawa-shi, Shizuoka  436-8501
   JAPAN

   Phone: +81 537 23 9655
   Email: kawashimam@vx.jp.nec.com


   Cameron Byrne
   T-Mobile USA
   Bellevue, Washington  98006
   USA

   Email: cameron.byrne@t-mobile.com























Mawatari, et al.         Expires March 22, 2013                [Page 14]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/