IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] Q about IPv4-mapped IPv6 address & MPLS

Gert Doering <gert@space.net> Thu, 01 May 2014 09:02 UTC

Return-Path: <gert@Space.Net>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85AE31A88EA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 02:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c_ZR8lXH84I5 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 May 2014 02:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C611A6F04 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 May 2014 02:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietf.org
Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C97262A51 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 May 2014 11:02:17 +0200 (CEST)
X-SpaceNet-Relay: true
Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 370DE62A41 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 May 2014 11:02:17 +0200 (CEST)
Received: (qmail 67576 invoked by uid 1007); 1 May 2014 11:02:17 +0200
Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 11:02:17 +0200
From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>
Message-ID: <20140501090217.GH43641@Space.Net>
References: <CF875D2F.1951A9%rajiva@cisco.com> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1405010836220.29282@uplift.swm.pp.se> <CF882A16.4EA36%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CF882A16.4EA36%hesham@elevatemobile.com>
X-NCC-RegID: de.space
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/USkE-kgceWwe_Ag6w_v-TAUEssU
Cc: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>, "6man@ietf.org" <6man@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Q about IPv4-mapped IPv6 address & MPLS
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 09:02:22 -0000

Hi,

On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 04:46:33PM +1000, Hesham Soliman wrote:
> >I realise this draft seems to have died, but I would never expect to see
> >packets with these addresses on the wire
> 
> => I recall an information RFC but don¹t remember the number. I agree they
> will most likely not appear on the wire.
> 
> > or in the routing table
> 
> => That¹s a different story. I don¹t think there is anything banning this,

If the packets are not going to appear on the wire, argueing about the
content of the routing table is a bit... theoretical.

I'd argue for internal representations of stuff to not use that format
either, as it will just confuse things.  The dual-stack API is bad enough
for operating system implementors (ran into a bunch of issues with Linux
recently) to avoid further use of v4-mapped stuff, anywhere.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email