Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Fri Jul 19 22:35:40 CEST 2013
On 19/07/2013 22:15, Tim Chown wrote:
> On 19 Jul 2013, at 10:34, Phil Mayers <p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk> wrote:
>> On 07/18/2013 09:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>> Wait... I had the impression that iff there was no other IPv6 connectivity,
>>> Teredo was used in older Windows because of the generic "prefer IPv6" rule.
>>> The default RFC 3484 table covers 6to4 but not Teredo.
>> AFAIK, every version of windows (i.e. Vista, 7, 8) that comes with Teredo also comes with a de-pref rule for it, not just "recent" versions.
>> Put another way, Teredo should never be preferred over IPv4, because all versions of Windows with Teredo use extended RFC 3484 rules.
>> Most of the Teredo activity we see is when IP addresses are used directly (i.e. no getaddrinfo). For example, BitTorrent connections where peers were looked up in DHT/PEX. In these cases, an IPv6 address will be connected to over Teredo if there's no other connectivity.
> Again, my understanding is the same as Phil's here.
I think my recollection is of Teredo with Windows XP SP2. But I
could be wrong, of course. In any case, the case for phasing out
Teredo is strong, like the case for disabling client-side 6to4.
> Many vendors/implementors started adding rules that ultimately appeared in RFC6724 long before RFC6724 was published. It took 6 years(!) for that update to be completed through the IETF.
> There are however some platforms stuck on 3484 or that don't follow such rules (Mac OSX is an interesting one...)
More information about the ipv6-ops