Re: Problems with removing NAT from a network

[Benson Schliesser <bensons () queuefull net>]

On Jan 5, 2011, at 10:31 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
> Which is one of the reasons why DS-lite is a better solution for
> providing legacy access to the IPv4 Internet than NAT64/DNS64.
> DS-lite only breaks what NAT44 breaks.  DS-lite doesn't break new
> things.

Or just run a dual-stack network, with centralized NAT44, and avoid the headache of tunneling.  If you're going to run 
two protocol families on the end host, and deal with the issues that causes, why require tunneling to make it work?  Is 
it so hard to forward IPv4 packets natively?

Cheers,
-Benson