Correct. Just like deprecating site locals resulted in people treating them same as globals (no special case), deprecating v4-compatibles resulted in treating them same as globals (no code checks for this range). I don't know how non-Windows OSs deal with this, hence my suggestion that Marcelo/Iljitsch try this on the other OS's they're checking for comparison.
-Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Ted Lemon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 2:43 PM > To: Dave Thaler > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] practical issues with using v4-mapped addresses > for nat64 > > On Jul 23, 2008, at 2:05 PM, Dave Thaler wrote: > > I just tried on Vista SP1 and it does send out a packet natively to > > a ::/96 address, although I believe Windows XP still supported > > v4-compatible tunnels and so won't (but XP doesn't claim to work > > on IPv6-only networks). > > Just to be clear, do you mean that if an IPv6 app opens an IPv6 socket > and connects to a ::/96 address, the Vista network stack forms an IPv6 > frame and sends it to that address just as it would to any ordinary > IPv6 address? > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
