Pekka Savola escribió:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 23 jul 2008, at 2:25, Dave Thaler wrote:
Both Windows vista and MacOS Leopard Dual stack connecting to
test1: it
works so it sends IPv4 packets... this seems reasonable, but i wonder
if it is always ok.
Both Windows vista and MacOS leopard Dual stack sending to test2: it
works and it they both send IPv6 packets, (this is what we want!)
Yes, this is excellent news.
Not really, because it doesn't buy us anything: it just means that on
dual stack systems, the mapped addresses in AAAA records don't get in
the way.
What we need is for IPv6-only systems to successfully send and
receive IPv6 packets with mapped addresses as the source or
destination. And we haven't seen any type of system do this so far.
I'm not sure that "we" (if it implies the IETF and network community
in general) need to be able to send and receive v6 packets with mapped
addresses as the source or destination.
Why is using the mapped addresses on the wire such a holy grail of
v6-only operation?
As a destination address, it might result in IPv6 DFZ being polluted
with the corresponding v4 routes except if you only use it in very
restricted environments (e.g. default route only).
As a source address, if the node(s) on link are also provided with
real IPv6 addresses, this would be indistinguishable from source
address spoofing.
I'd like folks to just forget about the mapped addresses on the wire
and find other kind of solutions for this problem.
what about v4 compatible address? do you see problems in there?
Regards, marcelo
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
