Qualifying the Harmfulness of Address Translation

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual)
Author Christian Vogt 
Last updated 2009-07-13
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at


Address translation is widely considered harmful because it conflicts with design principles highly regarded within the Internet engineering community. Still, address translation has become common practice despite technical problems because it constitutes an easy- to-deploy solution to a set of common operational needs. Since some of these needs will continue to exist in IP version 6, there is concern within the Internet engineering community about the potential proliferation of harmful technology from IP version 4 to IP version 6. This document investigates this concern. It compares feasible address translator designs with respect to the harmful impact they may have, explains why the problems of address translation, as used today, are to a significant extent entailed by the shortage of global addresses in IP version 4, and shows how the problems can be mitigated in IP version 6.


Christian Vogt (christian.vogt@ericsson.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)