Re: [v6ops] Happy eyeballs suggestions, was: Re: Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications

Erik Nygren <> Mon, 22 June 2015 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8724D1B3060 for <>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.423
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.423 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2KdnFWPf6v2c for <>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D1B21AD2D9 for <>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iebrt9 with SMTP id rt9so8312728ieb.2 for <>; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=2s45mn4ykd3maBZoNnPZQAHneZUNPr9QkddaCq0Ii0o=; b=lhUOFyCV+l2BxfFmF5fDcRCt65SGmdL6z2PKS/VsJrJIfK+2WMc0Rbt0Nbo7+4BIii wo21t1iTZiE5WETx75ZllqyMPcyXYQNAZhTK5NZifQdpJ1599k2F/u1LJoZLGwunzVk7 kkKRGpggMAVaB+mjIyIClEQ40se9e2koIKggHOycnQkbhzF3zbmckLzPGVEo5wtttysq 4qQ3RUWjQ063cEDOq3PbgWtAJgbEFbz0O2gO0SN6CBZ6qnlPP+G8T6YQOHOOSYOpqNxO 1CnUauwyiRt5wFR/Au14txy28qopCRQKL/M+6SnMF/5w5o2hO4TC67IZBT3icvTQRVLa G99w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id g14mr20455095ioi.21.1434992010582; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:53:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:53:30 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: LyLdyC6zuckvwaMFvBAXPaFxapQ
Message-ID: <>
From: Erik Nygren <>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113fb64e0be16d05191e1d20
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, Vividh Siddha <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Happy eyeballs suggestions, was: Re: Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 16:53:32 -0000

+1 to this

Having the NAT64/DNS64 environment is great for IPv6-only testing, but if
it doesn't provide the ability to get through to real IPv6
content/resources when the MacOS host has IPv6 connectivity (either
natively or via a tunnel) then it could be counter-productive in some
circumstances and could discourage app writers from developing their apps
to work well in scenarios where true end-to-end IPv6 connectivity is
possible.  Engineering and QA teams may instead focus purely on playing
well with NAT64/DNS64 than on also being able to avoid the NAT64 entirely
(which is clearly desirable for end-user performance.)


On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum <>

> About the test DNS64/NAT64 implementation:
> Obviously the test network isn't a "real" NAT64 test network when there's
> no native IPv6 present. And obviously there's no easy way to have native
> IPv6 materialize out of thin air. But someone who wants to test more
> thoroughly may want to get native IPv6 or set up a tunnel broker tunnel. It
> would be nice if the test NAT64 setup could work with that, so the devices
> on the test network can connect to IPv6 destinations over IPv6 and IPv4
> destinations through the NAT64.
> Basically, what's needed for this is that if the interface in question is
> configured with "real" IPv6 addresses, those are kept and the prefix in
> question is advertised in RAs.
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list