Hi Cameron, > If the application itself delivers an IPv4 literal via protocols like > MSN or Skype, there is a path and socket made available, that is what > this NAT46 code does. Is there a dependency on the existence of IPv4 literal so as to use the v4-interface provided by NAT46 code? IOW, does every IP-only app work now on n900? Cheers, Rajiv > -----Original Message----- > From: Cameron Byrne [mailto:cb.list6@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 3:14 PM > To: Rajiv Asati (rajiva) > Cc: Mark Townsley; Hui Deng; Softwires-wg list; Behave WG; IETF Discussion; > Dan Wing (dwing) > Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [Softwires] Last Call: <draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih- > 06.txt> (Dual Stack Hosts Using "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH)) to Proposed Standard > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) <rajiva@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Hi Cameron, > > > > Very interesting (& clever indeed). > > > > > > How does this clever code ensure that all but a few (pesky apps) > > continue to use IPv6 interface instead of the NAT46 interface? > > Rajiv, > > DNS64 is used. So anything that can take a AAAA will use a AAAA and > the native IPv6 path, with or without NAT64 -- as needed. > > If the application itself delivers an IPv4 literal via protocols like > MSN or Skype, there is a path and socket made available, that is what > this NAT46 code does. > > As i mentioned before, i don't like this. But, i respect that it > works and it solves a real problem for users of these ipv4-only apps. > I personally find it easy to live with only IP version agnostic apps > that work well in an IPv6-only NAT64/DNS64 network. I have been > eating this "dog food" for over 18 months. I am happy to let the > market and eco-system punish apps for not supporting IPv6, and for the > market to reward apps that do support IPv6. > > I believe draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih-06 has too narrow of a scope to > be useful since it explicitly does NOT support IPv4-only apps talking > to IPv4 servers over an IPv6-only network > > Cameron > > > Cheers, > > Rajiv > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: behave-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:behave-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On > > Behalf Of > >> Cameron Byrne > >> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 2:12 PM > >> To: Mark Townsley > >> Cc: Hui Deng; Softwires-wg list; Behave WG; IETF Discussion; Dan Wing > > (dwing) > >> Subject: Re: [BEHAVE] [Softwires] Last Call: > > <draft-ietf-behave-v4v6-bih- > >> 06.txt> (Dual Stack Hosts Using "Bump-in-the-Host" (BIH)) to Proposed > > Standard > >> > >> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Mark Townsley <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> >>> +1 ... since the alternative is that apps that require ipv4 > > sockets and > >> >>> pass ipv4 literals are stranded on ipv6 only networks. > >> >>> > >> >>> Running code on the n900 shows that nat464 provides real user and > >> >>> network benefit > >> > > >> > Frankly, I preferred it when you were running IPv6-only without BIH > > on your > >> trial, providing pressure to get rid of all those stranded literals > > and > >> pushing apps to open ipv6 sockets :-/ > >> > > >> > - Mark > >> > >> We're still doing that, and IPv6-only is still my philosophical > >> preference and that is how we are launching the IPv6 + NAT64/DNS64 > >> service into the production mobile network (real soon now). No change > >> in that path. > >> > >> But some "power users" wanted their IPv4-only applications like Skype > >> to work so they coded a NAT46 work-around for the N900. It is clever, > >> it works. > >> > >> Their process of feeling the pain of a very few pesky IPv4-only apps > >> and working around it is all documented here: > >> http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=60320 > >> > >> Running NAT46 code here: http://code.google.com/p/n900ipv6/wiki/Nat64D > >> > >> In the end (as well as IPv6-only near term in mobile), IP version > >> agnostic apps will prove to be more reliable and therefore will get > >> more market share. > >> > >> Cameron > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Behave mailing list > >> Behave@xxxxxxxx > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/behave > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf