On 1/11/17 4:47 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 16:26 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
I'm sure I understand what you're saying here. There should be no flow
to terminate.
I think you figured out that I meant "I'm not sure I understand...".
rfc2765 describes a way to use IPv
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 16:26 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
> I'm sure I understand what you're saying here. There should be no flow
> to terminate.
rfc2765 describes a way to use IPv4-mapped IPv6 packets on the wire.
What I meant by 'terminating' was that it does not tell if an end system
(
On 1/11/17 3:43 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 14:59 -0500, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
I think the RFC states somewhere that you should never ever
send out a v4 mapped address on the wire.
Can you point the exact RFC ?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2765 seems to allow just tha
On (01/11/17 12:43), Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 14:59 -0500, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
>
> > I think the RFC states somewhere that you should never ever
> > send out a v4 mapped address on the wire.
>
> Can you point the exact RFC ?
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2765 seem
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 14:59 -0500, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
> I think the RFC states somewhere that you should never ever
> send out a v4 mapped address on the wire.
Can you point the exact RFC ?
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2765 seems to allow just that.
Jonathan issue is about terminating
On (01/11/17 14:48), Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
>
> I would say that an IPv6 socket binds to an IPv4-mapped IPv6
> address, but yes - using it to connect to an IPv6 address would be
> an application bug. It also think that having connect() spend 2
> minutes sending packets containing an illegal s
On 1/11/17 1:31 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 12:34 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
On 1/11/17 11:20 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 16:25 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
I've observed TCP using an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as the source
address, which I be
On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 12:34 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
> On 1/11/17 11:20 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 16:25 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
> >> I've observed TCP using an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as the source
> >> address, which I believe contradicts
> >> https://
On 1/11/17 11:20 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 16:25 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
I've observed TCP using an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as the source
address, which I believe contradicts
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6890#page-14 (BCP 153). This occurs when
an IPv6 TCP socke
On Thu, 2017-01-05 at 16:25 -0500, Jonathan T. Leighton wrote:
> I've observed TCP using an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as the source
> address, which I believe contradicts
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6890#page-14 (BCP 153). This occurs when
> an IPv6 TCP socket, bound to a local IPv4-mapped I
I've observed TCP using an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address as the source
address, which I believe contradicts
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6890#page-14 (BCP 153). This occurs when
an IPv6 TCP socket, bound to a local IPv4-mapped IPv6 address, attempts
to connect to a remote IPv6 address. Presumable
11 matches
Mail list logo
