075d187ee3
Cleanup patches. OBS-URL: https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/114582 OBS-URL: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/Base:System/glibc?expand=0&rev=170
79 lines
3.6 KiB
Diff
79 lines
3.6 KiB
Diff
Index: glibc-2.15/posix/gai.conf
|
|
===================================================================
|
|
--- glibc-2.15.orig/posix/gai.conf
|
|
+++ glibc-2.15/posix/gai.conf
|
|
@@ -67,11 +67,66 @@
|
|
#scopev4 ::ffff:192.168.0.0/112 5
|
|
#scopev4 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 14
|
|
#
|
|
-# For sites which use site-local IPv4 addresses behind NAT there is
|
|
-# the problem that even if IPv4 addresses are preferred they do not
|
|
-# have the same scope and are therefore not sorted first. To change
|
|
-# this use only these rules:
|
|
+# Back in 2003, the sorting algorithm used by getaddrinfo() was defined in RFC
|
|
+# 3484. However, this document did not take into account (or foresee) the
|
|
+# ubiquity of IPv4 NAT on today's internet. This in turn causes some real
|
|
+# operational problems that's hindering the deployment of IPv6 for content
|
|
+# providers.
|
|
+#
|
|
+# The problem scenario is the following:
|
|
+#
|
|
+# An end user is located in a network numbered with private (RFC 1918) IPv4
|
|
+# addresses and transitional 6to4 (RFC 3056) IPv6 addresses. The network is
|
|
+# connected to the internet by a CPE/SOHO device implementing NAT for IPv4 and
|
|
+# anycasted 6to4 (RFC 3068) for IPv6.
|
|
+#
|
|
+# When the user attempts to connect to a server whose hostname has both IPv4
|
|
+# and IPv6 addresses published in DNS, an IPv6 connection using the
|
|
+# transitional 6to4 service will be preferred. This happens because the scope
|
|
+# comparison fails for IPv4, the RFC 1918 addresses are assumed to have
|
|
+# site-local scope, which is smaller than the global scope of the server's IPv4
|
|
+# address. For IPv6, both the server's and the client's (6to4) address have
|
|
+# global scope.
|
|
+#
|
|
+# Unfortunately, the operational reality is that a transitional technique such
|
|
+# as 6to4 is much less reliable than IPv4. The relay routers might be located
|
|
+# far away from the optimal IPv4 path, and thus cause a significant latency
|
|
+# increase, or they might not even work optimally (they're usually operated by
|
|
+# voulenteering third parties on a best-effort basis), and finally some ISPs
|
|
+# simply filter away all proto-41 traffic. Transitional techniques are useful
|
|
+# to give end users with IPv4-only service a real shot at accessing IPv6-only
|
|
+# content, but it should never be preferred over IPv4 service when accessing
|
|
+# dual-stacked content.
|
|
+#
|
|
+# RFC 3484 even acknowledges this, by saying to "avoid the use of transitional
|
|
+# addresses when native addresses are available".
|
|
+#
|
|
+# An IETF draft document which describes the problem in a much more detailed
|
|
+# manner than I have is available here:
|
|
+#
|
|
+# http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-denis-v6ops-nat-addrsel-00
|
|
+#
|
|
+# There's also an IETF draft that aims to revise RFC 3484 in order to fix this
|
|
+# problem (amongst others):
|
|
+#
|
|
+# http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-arifumi-6man-rfc3484-revise-02
|
|
+#
|
|
+# Quoting from this document:
|
|
+#
|
|
+# > 2.7. To change private IPv4 address scope
|
|
+# >
|
|
+# > As detailed in Remi's draft [I-D.denis-v6ops-nat-addrsel], when a
|
|
+# > host is in NATed site, and has a private IPv4 address and
|
|
+# > transitional addresses like 6to4 and Teredo, the host chooses
|
|
+# > transitional IPv6 address to access most of the dual-stack servers.
|
|
+# >
|
|
+# > This is because private IPv4 address is defined to be site-local
|
|
+# > scope, and as in RFC 3484, the scope matching rules (Rule 2) set
|
|
+# > lower priority for private IPv4 address.
|
|
+# >
|
|
+# > By changing the address scope of private IPv4 address to global, this
|
|
+# > problem can be solved.
|
|
#
|
|
-#scopev4 ::ffff:169.254.0.0/112 2
|
|
-#scopev4 ::ffff:127.0.0.0/104 2
|
|
-#scopev4 ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 14
|
|
+scopev4 ::ffff:10.0.0.0/104 14
|
|
+scopev4 ::ffff:172.16.0.0/108 14
|
|
+scopev4 ::ffff:192.168.0.0/112 14
|