Re: [v6ops] use of Teredo addresses in Apple devices

Edwin Cordeiro <edwin@scordeiro.net> Fri, 24 July 2015 09:17 UTC

Return-Path: <edwinsc@gmail.com>
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 E01521A88B1 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.277
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, 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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HWnXMh5yIMy2 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:17:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x236.google.com (mail-lb0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48BEC1A888B for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:16:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbyj8 with SMTP id yj8so11293631lbb.0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=J8pMKV4Heb3AdeCu0QX1ELnLlZPuHwriMovmmlWUl4A=; b=VZJaBT4qlYCPrekqe9uJ8pZsROqu3GDmuGWhQEEI/G2timqhNw8ZqOG7k7wHMLr5Ot s7WoFlrt+9Dt4Knpmf0vKrs6tnyetNQpqh85Y7rWzNNqsWbwF1MC3e9qfBCjSSAy3nFy HYkDn20ddbB1SXckfNPUyDtcbnnwxI4xbrIJ+ZDdIoPLcKmU96RJJp/M6OQ4z5c+hiCs Ig6+qtSJQtqSMYG2rxHdgYH60mrD6AJN59K5SAI5zoRPaWaqSbsL4RWIs8EA0MoID1Cq v9p0Rq9eCyAg8KcBMTPJA/QJ2ApLEgW3eMFAypH1f8axHNgJny+iv8wHgtnZTpT4aa1K ktew==
X-Received: by 10.152.22.99 with SMTP id c3mr12945588laf.32.1437729416775; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:16:56 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: edwinsc@gmail.com
Received: by 10.152.26.40 with HTTP; Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:16:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3ED-0HOXNUWNeqcdx9cmBhQJDigzDjOryfiSLTG-rubg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61132A90D2D@GAALPA1MSGUSRBF.ITServices.sbc.com> <CAKD1Yr3ED-0HOXNUWNeqcdx9cmBhQJDigzDjOryfiSLTG-rubg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Edwin Cordeiro <edwin@scordeiro.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:16:27 +0200
X-Google-Sender-Auth: hPmueh4i34B3eAhrrio0KdIeCVA
Message-ID: <CAERpkxAJzprn-W7b5MjJKEfmz+QpjM5a8UXU==hy1Ku80gTHjw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158b6c02b8dd9051b9b771a
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/cBk_1Tb7Yuw_RVeVQZDeuIfEz1c>
Cc: v6ops list <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] use of Teredo addresses in Apple devices
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:17:03 -0000

Even if the address is used only inside the telephone, I don't think using
the Teredo address is a good idea, as once it started being used in one
product it may be extended in other products of the company with unexpected
results.

If any of the addresses already reserved at IANA fits your need (
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space/ipv6-address-space.xhtml),
suggest a new one to be reserved.

In a previous discussion about extending the documentation reserved
addresses, one important comment was that no words should be used to give
additional meaning our proposed IPv6 reserved space, despite the temptation.



Edwin Cordeiro

On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:37 AM, Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
wrote:

> I'm not sure that using ULAs is a good idea. ULAs are not likely to be
> representative of real NAT64 deployments, which use global addresses.
>
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:24 AM, STARK, BARBARA H <bs7652@att.com> wrote:
>
>> Great presentation on what Apple is doing to drive apps to implement IPv6.
>> In thinking about use of the Teredo address space to advertise a prefix
>> to tethered devices, I do have a concern. In many of my personal home
>> networked devices, I've purposefully disabled Teredo and ISATAP and even
>> put in some rules to prevent the devices from accepting such addresses.
>>
>> I think this would be a reasonable use of a ULA. A PI might be even
>> better. I hear PIs are pretty easy to come by. The PI would have the
>> advantage of being known to come from an Apple device for this NAT64
>> purpose. That could help with trouble shooting.
>> Barbara
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> v6ops mailing list
>> v6ops@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
>