@techreport{durand-v6ops-dualstack-vs-natpt-00,
    number =    {draft-durand-v6ops-dualstack-vs-natpt-00},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-durand-v6ops-dualstack-vs-natpt/00/},
    author =    {Alain Durand},
    title =     {{Dual stack vs NAT-PT}},
    pagetotal = 0,
    year =      2003,
    month =     feb,
    day =       24,
    abstract =  {Outside of the IETF community, lot of people think that IPv4 to IPv6 transition consist merely at solving the problem of how does a v4 box communicate with a v6 box and vice versa. Within the IETF, the dual stack approach has long been defined. There is an ongoing discussion to understand if translation with tools like {[}NAT-PT{]} is absolutly needed to enable IPv6 nodes to communicate with an IPv4 node or if we can/should mandate IPv6 nodes to also deploy an IPv4 stack if/when they needs to communicate with IPv4 nodes. This draft is aimed at clarifying the discussion without taking side by studying in 3 cases the implications of mandating a dual-stack versus the implications of deploying a translation device.},
}