Why go through all that trouble when you could make the server app dual-stack capable in the first place? That could be done with or without assigning a unique v4 address to it, simply running v4 over v6... Not you¹d be back to a v4 app talking to a v4 app on hosts only having v6 addresses configured natively.
- Alain. On 12/1/09 11:45 AM, "Sri Gundavelli" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Thanks. I guess, Hui will suggest, the host running the future IPv6 app will > not have IPv4 support and it can only use IPv6 transport. And this > application needs to talk to a peer which is a legacy IPv4 application. That > legacy peer application is running on a host which has only IPv6 transport, > but the application is a legacy application and it only open a IPv4 > transport and not use IPv6 transport. Might be confusing, but that is the > argument I heard and so I listed it separately, else to most part we can > fold them to #1 or #2, and in some case to #3. > > > Regards > Sri > > > > On 12/1/09 8:33 AM, "Simon Perreault" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > ly not IPv6-only. They are version-independent. See >> > e.g. RFC4038. So your future app will try IPv4 if it cannot get IPv6 >> > connectivity. Which, it seems to me, would ma > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
