[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: One socket per AF (Was: 6to4 using ::FFFF:0000:0000/96...)



Rémi Després wrote:
Jeroen Massar wrote :
Rémi Després wrote:
Why ???

Because ::x.x.x.x and ::ffff:x.x.x.x are IPv4, it is not IPv6.

IMO too general to be sufficient

It very generally is a very bad general idea ;)

It *WAS* a great idea in the beginning, to get IPv6 going and to get some form of communication between IPv4 and IPv6, but if you have written a couple of programs (not clients) and bumped into it a couple of times you will realize that it is not a good idea.

I am fully with our samurai on this one.

Consider in particular a dual stack site with a private IPv4 space.
Its CPE, which has a NATv4-v4, may also have a NATv6-v4.
If it has one, and if it uses it for outgoing packets that have 0::/64

::/96 you mean I guess ;)
No.
Routing is in general performed on 64 bits (the remainder is IID, IMU not candiadate to be part of a prefix).
But no objection to /96 where it is supported.

Please see RFC4291 section 2.5.5.1 and 2.5.5.2. These special prefixes are longer and are excluded from that space, they are special after all.

[..]
IMHO this is nice and clean.

That is very dirty in my opinion.
Matter of taste then.
But at least this lets a real *IPv6-only* hostto reach an IPv4-only server, e.g. in HTTP.

Please use application proxies for this, and not routing tricks and by introducing NAT into IPv6. NAT-PT was deprecated for a reason.

[..]
The reference I know on the subject is
file:///Users/Pro/Documents/_%20TECHNIQUE%20/IPv6-IPv4/MSG%20Itojun%20Hagino%20-%20Mapped%20addresses%20Considered%20Harmful00301.html

I am pretty sure I can't reach that location.
>
I copied this URL, pasted it in Mozilla thunderbird, and reached the (obsolete) document.

Unless you give all of the IETF access to your local disk some way, and include a hostname in that URL, then we might be able to see the document that you are linking to ;)

Either you were wrong in being "pretty sure" (once more ??) or your browser, or your OS, has a problem.

I am still pretty sure about this. I guess you should take a good deep look at the url :)

*hint*, it starts with file:// and then has /Users/Pro/Documents/.....

/me passes out fresh caffeine shots ;)

Indeed it works for you locally, as it is on your local disk, that is the trick with the file: protocol handler.

Please provide a link to the document that resides on the public internet. (Starting with 'http(s)://' is a good thing).

Greets,
 Jeroen

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature