North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 routing /48s

  • From: Jack Bates
  • Date: Fri Nov 21 11:16:23 2008
Florian Weimer wrote: 
No, unfortunately broken 6to4 auto-configuration (ie, in Vista,
XPSP2, when on a non-RFC1918 IP address) breaks, and you get 90s
timeouts before falling back to IPv4/A.

This must be a broken RFC 3484 implementation:
- 6to4 should be less prerefed than IPv4 if the service has both AAAA
and A record.


RFC 3848 generally prefers IPv6 over IPv4 and fails if the host
running its algorithm has neither IPv6 connectivity nore mean to
detect that efficiently.  I think Windows does something in the second
area.

Yes and no. The test that was being run used 6to4 addresses, so every 6to4 capable device did try to reach it via 6to4, since that is preferred over IPv4. If it had used non-6to4 addressing, then IPv4 would had been preferred on those hosts that didn't have non-6to4 addresses.

This is one reason why I believe using 6to4 addresses to be an issue for content providers. If they use non-6to4 addressing for the content, then most people will prefer IPv4 except for those who have configured non-6to4 addresses or altered the labels to force 6to4 to work with non-6to4 addressing.

Gads, is it appropriate to just say Native when referring to non-6to4? lol


Jack