> -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Kaufman [mailto:matt...@matthew.at] > Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 6:55 PM > To: Owen DeLong > Cc: Nanog Operators' Group > Subject: Re: Problems with removing NAT from a network > > On 1/6/2011 5:48 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > Doesn't all of this become moot if Skype just develops a dual-stack > capable client > > and servers? > > > Not really. Imagine the case where you're on IPv6 and you can only > reach > IPv4 via a NAT64, and there's no progress made on the detection > problem. > And your family member is on a Skype-enabled TV plugged into an > IPv4-only ISP. > > Now you can't get a direct media path between you, even though their > ISP > is giving them IPv4 and your ISP is *claiming* you can "still reach the > IPv4 Internet". > > Skype can still make this work by relaying,
Skype could make it work with direct UDP packets in about 92% of cases, per Google's published direct-to-direct statistic at http://code.google.com/apis/talk/libjingle/important_concepts.html -d > but in order to protect the > relay machine's bandwidth it will rate-limit the traffic, and so your > A/V experience will suffer. And that's assuming there's enough > dual-stacked relays... if there aren't, it won't be possible to find a > relay that they can reach over IPv4 and you can reach over IPv6 that > has > available bandwidth. > > Matthew Kaufman