On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 09:15:44PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > Carel Fellinger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I search the net and the archive in vain to find whether ipv4 and ipv6 > > behave like seperate name spaces. So now I join the list, > > temporarely:) > > It are distinct namespaces but pointing to the same resources.
Great, just what I hoped for. ... > > And the next question: what address range to use for the above schema? > > Stick with the "::FFFF:" prefix for IPv4-Mapped addresses or switch to > > the "::" prefix for IPv4-Compatible addresses. > > IPv4-mapped is in a stadium of being deprecated at the moment. > ::192.168.1.1 is not valid, but ::ffff:192.168.1.1 is valid. > > Using IPv4 mapped addresses isn't encouraged. My knowledge on the subject is thin as can be, but I thought I read ::192.168.1.1 to be an IPv4-Compatible address. And this one being invalid and the other depricated, I'm left wondering which to use:) A little googling learned that I'm not alone in my confusion, and I fail to find a definitive source to clear it up, and even then I'm still wondering which definition you had in mind, so please help me:) To clear me out, could you comment on the below four statements? 1) IPv4-Compatible is an ordinary IPv4 address, prefixed with zero's (::). 2) IPv4-Compatible is invalid? 3) IPv4-Mapped is an ordinary IPv4 address, prefixed with ::ffff. 4) IPv4-Mapped is almost depricated, i.e. the `on-the-wire' form at least. -- groetjes, carel
