Le Mardi 30 Mai 2006 09:42, Arifumi Matsumoto a écrit : > About SIP and P2P applications, > especially nowadays, they are already NAT-aware.
They might be in a few years. They are definitely not yet, but OK, the updated spec is not there yet either. > So, even when you use a private IPv4 address under NAT router, > ULA/Teredo will be chosen for www.kame.net(whcih has public A and > AAAA) because ULA and Teredo has global scope. Ok, thanks for the clarification. > >> Similarly, it might (?) be nice to have a (IPv4) NAT-friendly > >> application profile and a NAT-unfriendly one, though they might be > >> caveats that I've not thought of. > > Yes, it sounds good if a host can detect NAT and use appropriate > address selection profile. But I guess the detection system will be > so complicated because the system has to be stateful and dynamic. I was actually thinking about selecting in the software rather than host-wide, such as through a new flag for getaddrinfo()'s “hints.ai_flags”. -- Rémi Denis-Courmont
pgpVlZ47J4Ul9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
