> >> that I personally use? I'm guessing about a half-dozen, though I don't > >> use them all everyday. some other apps work across NAT but with > >> degraded functionality. > > > > okay. if you could name them we can try to convince people who are > > responsible. > > > the people responsible for polluting the network with NATs? it's too > late to punish them, I fear :) no, the people who have implemented your applications that are written in IPv4-only and NAT-unfriendly, to be IPv4/v6 bilingual. i do not care about NAT (un)friendliness, i just need it to support IPv6. > > we kame are guilty for almost every application IPv6 support, including > > Python, Apache, Ruby, Postfix (wietse rewrote the whole thing), all tools > > on *BSD, BSD libc, whatever. honestly noone can beat us on this topic:-P > > > and the rest of us are very appreciative! of course, not all of the > applications that people use are those that are shipped with *BSD. and > while it's quite helpful if programming languages support IPv6, that > doesn't mean that the programs written in those languages will > automatically work with IPv6. well, that depends on what kind of programming language you will be using. Python uses a model where you explicitly need to invoke bind(2) and getaddrinfo(3), so the programmer has to be knowledgeable enough to handle IPv4/v6 stuff. iirc Ruby TCPSocket class embeds all the details about getaddrinfo(3) loop within the class/instance method, so you do not have to care about which IP version is in use. > > so, which is your real-world protocol which has the above problem? or > > is it a theoretical debate? "code then spec". > > > no, it's not a theoretical debate. I worked with a number of distributed > systems: PVM, some MPI implementations, and one of my own design that > didn't become so popular. There are a lot of applications layered on top > of one or the other of these. But unless you're into high-performance > computing you probably aren't aware of them. may i talk with you/designer of PVM/MPI code so that they can implement them in IPv6-friendly manner? privately. > > one way is to have a session-layer protocol (finally!). > > or, you can switch from TCP to SCTP. > > > for several reasons, SCTP is not a drop-in replacement for TCP. (but I'd > love to see further development and standardization of multipath TCP - > that seems like a very promising avenue) there were tons of multipath TCP drafts, but there's no real authentication so all of them failed badly. so i see some future in ssh. > > i have been trying to persuade openssh coders to have functionality > > to re-connect ssh session even when TCP session go down. if you tunnel > > everything over ssh, you won. > > > sigh. yes that would be valuable functionality, but somehow I don't > think that the answer to every problem imposed by shortsighted hacks in > the network is to push things down another layer. and this kind of > solution only solves the problem for two-node applications. please tell me, your apps are totally multicast or broadcast? if not, we need to solve 2-nodes communication first, then you can solve communication among n (n could be very big) nodes. > > you have to. you cannot be that lazy. > our goal in IETF should be to allow programmers to be that lazy. > separation of function between the host and the network is a Good Thing. > let the hosts exchange packets and the network route them. > > the goal is certainly not to keep increasing complexity of the network > and to keep making programmers' jobs more difficult. then use vendor libraries that are URL-based. > > or .Net framework (Windows) or > > CFNetwork (MacOS X) can handle it for you inside the library. > > > only if you want your application to be crippled in other ways. (my, you > have a simplistic view of the application world!) ??? i do not get your point. you would like to be lazy, then use libraries that are based on URLs. otherwise, you have to use getaddrinfo(3). other than that, either your design is broken or you are lazy. itojun _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf