[c-nsp] ASA vs. ASR for large Wireless NAT deployment ?

[Tom Lanyon]

On 29/11/2011, at 4:14 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 29, 2011 01:29:41 AM P C wrote:
>> I think t-mobile is running public customer trials with
>> IPV6-only customers and NAT64.  You can sign up here:
>> http://www.personal.psu.edu/dvm105/blogs/ipv6/2010/07/t-m
>> obile-ipv6-open-trial.html
> 
> We have ours working - of course, Skype and friends don't 
> work yet (although GTalk is working).

What are people using for an internal NAT64 prefix?

We're trialling a v6-only realm in our new datacentre deployment and using NAT64 on ASR1002s to reach the public v4 Internet.

The ASR1000s refused to use the well-known 64:ff9b::/96 prefix for stateful NAT64, so I've currently got it running on a FD64::/96 ULA prefix and keen to hear what others are doing.  Are you using private space or just using a /96 from your RIR allocated v6 space?

Thanks,
Tom