RFC 4864: Local Network Protection for IPv6

Although there are many perceived benefits to Network Address Translation (NAT), its primary benefit of "amplifying" available address space is not needed in…

Read RFC 4864 on the RFC Editor

Incoming relationships (11 related RFCs)

Normatively referenced by — RFC 6748: Optional Advanced Deployment Scenarios for the Identifier-Locator Network Protocol (ILNP)
Normatively referenced by — RFC 6204: Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers
Informatively referenced by — RFC 5920: Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks
Informatively referenced by — RFC 6296: IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation
Informatively referenced by — RFC 6092: Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing Residential IPv6 Internet Service
Informatively referenced by — RFC 4942: IPv6 Transition/Co-existence Security Considerations
Informatively referenced by — RFC 5218: What Makes for a Successful Protocol?
Informatively referenced by — RFC 9099: Operational Security Considerations for IPv6 Networks
Informatively referenced by — RFC 5902: IAB Thoughts on IPv6 Network Address Translation
Informatively referenced by — RFC 7098: Using the IPv6 Flow Label for Load Balancing in Server Farms
Informatively referenced by — RFC 6629: Considerations on the Application of the Level 3 Multihoming Shim Protocol for IPv6 (Shim6)