Re: [v6ops] Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications

Ca By <> Fri, 19 June 2015 22:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E5771B2B66 for <>; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.951
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, 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 YL-iUgcE0X0l for <>; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 700DE1B2B63 for <>; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wgfq1 with SMTP id q1so52960505wgf.1 for <>; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4oymqIpflCymK22cLohOP3/2n+bvQAOLf3ilZD8+CCM=; b=EMzjvoI7vv8hZSyQ3e+afsNgcuxmo0Bz31fNMoBDiooQzNXCI/Lvhyqc83GYNJWwh7 r/rIYFgwcKn5+Oxf7Dk+hv0DU0SZPfckj4uhkPAdNDGreovgMixOxeKgm7uwfnKjrmx2 DQdA5iM/47gaSSJKY/KQ5kipKlVqTdGkwpy270HmSxpjk8MKFwLEobZYdKCgOP/M9AvZ cFIczJ9ZX2x66K7VPJw2OHA9JHkJEpsBWy8Q2XrPIFxCNlkuNmLQiY0aRfaRnsD6hIfC YpzGnfDMZPDRzZSFG8BbLHUS0Mf9ymZEsfjf98sQOslrDc4ka9Xqh9sifUp2+r4fSZcZ bDow==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id dg10mr10554784wib.41.1434751816167; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:10:16 -0700
Message-ID: <>
From: Ca By <>
To: David Schinazi <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04447f8357f89d0518e630a6
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>, Vividh Siddha <>, Tommy Pauly <>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] 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: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 22:10:19 -0000


All of this is good news.  Thank you.

I assume the goal is for Apple users to have a good experience on
production ipv6-only nat64/dns64 network.

When do you expect mobile operators to be able to launch production quality
ipv6-only? When should the apn config flip from ipv4 to ipv6?

Finally, are you running your iPhone on ipv6-only LTE?  I am. It is very
important to eat the dog food.


On Friday, June 19, 2015, David Schinazi <> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> I'd like to clarify a few points about Apple's IPv6 announcements during
> WWDC 2015.
> The video (streaming with Safari or download with all browsers) and slides
> of that talk
> are available at:
> *) Personal hotspot on iOS
> If your iPhone has dual-stack connectivity on its cellular network, the
> hotspot it creates
> will be dual-stack as well. The phone will share its prefix with Wi-Fi
> clients.
> *) Internet Sharing on the Mac
> Today, regular internet sharing (from your ethernet to Wi-Fi for example)
> does not
> support IPv6 because of the limited use cases, and the lack of demand for
> it.
> *) Internet Sharing on the Mac - NAT64 testing mode
> The NAT64 test mode was designed to help developers ensure that their app
> can still
> function with IPv6-only NAT64+DNS64 connectivity and communicate with
> their IPv4
> server, even if the developer does not have access to the IPv6 internet.
> That NAT64
> network does not have IPv6 connectivity to the global IPv6 internet. As
> such, the current
> version advertises addresses from 2001::/64 instead of ULAs to simulate
> real IPv6
> connectivity, as all IPv6 packets are terminated at the NAT64 server on
> the Mac.
> This implementation detail could change in the future.
> *) Making IPv4 literals work on NAT64 networks when using high-level APIs
> Starting with this year's versions, if you use NSURLSession to connect to
> an IPv4
> literal on an IPv6-only NAT64-DNS64 network, the API will bump in a IPv6
> literal
> synthesized using RFC 7050. Note that this will not happen when using
> sockets
> directly. We do not support under-the-sockets bump-in-API (RFC 3338) and we
> do not support 464XLAT.
> *) Happy Eyeballs
> We've heard feedback on our Happy Eyeballs implementation and are
> investigating
> this topic.
> Note that this reflects how these technologies work in the current
> versions of the
> 2015 betas, many of these details could change in future betas. Please
> keep in mind
> that these betas are previews and we welcome feedback on improving them.
> Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, I will also attend
> IETF93.
> Thanks,
> David Schinazi
> Apple CoreOS Networking Engineer