| > | Section 7.7, "Shim6 and IPv6 NAT", the problem could be overcome by
| > the
| > | Shim6 node knowing its IPv6 address after NPTv6 translation.
| > Probably
| > not
| > | worth adjusting the document, though, as NPTv6 is experimental.
| > Well, this would not work for HBA, since in this case the addresses
| > are fixed once generated.
| NPTv6 does not change the host portion of the address (it only changes
| network portion -- the IPv6 prefix), so HBA should work with NPTv6.
Well, HBAs are built as a hash of many things, including the different
prefixes for which you want to generate an address. Different interface
identifiers are generated by changing the order in which the hash is
The issue with NPTv6 is that, in order to verify that the locator is a valid
HBA, the receiver checks that the prefix of the locator is included in the
HBA Parameter Data Structure, and then that the appropriate hash of the
Parameter Data Structure corresponds to the interface identifier. If the
NPTv6 changes the prefix, the first validation, the one regarding to the
prefix, will fail, and HBAs will not work.