[Mip6] [issue73] v4 mapped address in IPv6 header

Koshiro MITSUYA <tracker-mip6@mip4.org> Tue, 21 March 2006 14:36 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLhyk-0004R0-0e; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:36:58 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLhyh-0004Qv-Px for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:36:55 -0500
Received: from av9-2-sn2.hy.skanova.net ([81.228.8.180]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FLhyg-0001xz-BO for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 09:36:55 -0500
Received: by av9-2-sn2.hy.skanova.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 429B837F02; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:36:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from smtp4-1-sn2.hy.skanova.net (smtp4-1-sn2.hy.skanova.net [81.228.8.92]) by av9-2-sn2.hy.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D05A383BD for <mip6@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:36:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from shiraz.levkowetz.com (81-224-201-50-no45.tbcn.telia.com [81.224.201.50]) by smtp4-1-sn2.hy.skanova.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E7937E53 for <mip6@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:36:53 +0100 (CET)
Received: from shiraz.local.levkowetz.com ([192.168.3.14] helo=shiraz.levkowetz.com) by shiraz.levkowetz.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from <roundup-admin@mip4.org>) id 1FLhyc-0007hw-VV for mip6@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Mar 2006 15:36:52 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
To: mip6@ietf.org
From: Koshiro MITSUYA <tracker-mip6@mip4.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:36:50 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <1142951810.2.0.489475597854.issue73@mip4.org>
X-Roundup-Name: Mip6 issue tracker
X-Roundup-Loop: hello
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 192.168.3.14
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: roundup-admin@mip4.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on shiraz.levkowetz.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.4 required=3.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham version=3.1.0
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2 (built Thu, 16 Feb 2006 12:49:04 +1100)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on shiraz.levkowetz.com)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465
Subject: [Mip6] [issue73] v4 mapped address in IPv6 header
X-BeenThere: mip6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Mip6 issue tracker <tracker-mip6@mip4.org>
List-Id: mip6.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6>, <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:mip6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6>, <mailto:mip6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: mip6-bounces@ietf.org

New submission from Koshiro MITSUYA <mitsuya@sfc.wide.ad.jp>:

the IPv4 mapped address has a special meaning by RFC
2553 API.  It is not preferable to use the mapped address in IPv6
headers (See the following the drafts)
	draft-itojun-v6ops-v4mapped-harmful
	draft-cmetz-v6ops-v4mapped-api-harmful

In our code based on KAME, the IPv6 implementation discard a IPv6
header which has the v4 mapped address for sanity at ip6_input() and
ip6_rthadr2().  We also need to add the mapped address in an address
list (the list of all addresses which the node has) to receive the
header.  This is somehow uncomfortable because the mapped address is
actually not routable.

>From Hesham:
=> No one suggested that it should/would be routable. It's simply
used to keep the packet format. There is no routing based on this 
information. 

>From Koshiro:
=> I am not sure whether it's just an implementation issues.  But putting
the mapped address in the address list in order to process the DSMIP
IPv6 header means the mapped address may be chosen as a source address
even the address is actually not routable.  To avoid this, we need
e.g. an additional flag to distinguish the mapped address from others.
I think some implementers will not accept this.

The above is not only the reason again the mapped address in the IPv6
header.  Please refer the draft-*-harmful.  So, my idea is to put HoA
in IPv6 header and kind of IPv4 CoA option to idicate it's IPv4 CoA.

BTW, if you just want to keep the packer format, I think it's better
to use compatible address, or 6to4 address, or newly-defined address
for this purpose.

----------
category: Technical
draft: draft-ietf-mip6-nemo-v4traversal
messages: 237
nosy: mitsuya
priority: Should fix
status: No discussion
title: v4 mapped address in IPv6 header

_________________________________________________
Mip6 issue tracker <tracker-mip6@mip4.org>
<http://www.mip4.org/issues/tracker/mip6/issue73>
_________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
Mip6 mailing list
Mip6@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mip6