352-001 · Question #269
A company supports IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, and they need to be able to support flow- based translations for multiple IPv6 devices to a single IPv4 address. Which address family translation design sol
The correct answer is D. stateful NAT64. Stateful NAT64 maintains a binding table of IPv6-to-IPv4 address and port mappings, enabling many IPv6 devices to share a single IPv4 address through port multiplexing.
Question
A company supports IPv4 and IPv6 addresses, and they need to be able to support flow- based translations for multiple IPv6 devices to a single IPv4 address. Which address family translation design solution should be recommended?
Options
- Astateful NAT-PT
- BNAT-PT
- Cstateless NAT64
- Dstateful NAT64
How the community answered
(21 responses)- A5% (1)
- B14% (3)
- C5% (1)
- D76% (16)
Why each option
Stateful NAT64 maintains a binding table of IPv6-to-IPv4 address and port mappings, enabling many IPv6 devices to share a single IPv4 address through port multiplexing.
Stateful NAT-PT is an older deprecated protocol superseded by NAT64, and RFC 4966 identified fundamental design flaws that make it unsuitable for new deployments.
NAT-PT was deprecated by RFC 4966 due to inherent architectural problems including DNS-ALG dependencies and is no longer recommended for any deployment.
Stateless NAT64 (RFC 6145) uses an algorithmic one-to-one mapping between IPv6 and IPv4 addresses and cannot support multiple IPv6 hosts sharing a single IPv4 address.
Stateful NAT64, defined in RFC 6146, operates like IPv4 PAT/NAPT by creating per-flow state entries that map each IPv6 source address and port to a shared IPv4 address with a unique port, allowing many-to-one translation. The stateful binding table ensures that return IPv4 traffic is correctly translated back and delivered to the originating IPv6 host. This directly satisfies the requirement for flow-based translations from multiple IPv6 devices to a single IPv4 address.
Concept tested: Stateful NAT64 many-to-one IPv6 to IPv4 translation
Source: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6146
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.