Re: kern/44943: 2002::/16 (6to4) addresses are preferred over native IPv6 transport

[Fredrik Pettai <pettai%nordu.net@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR misc/44943; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Fredrik Pettai <pettai%nordu.net@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: misc-bug-people%NetBSD.org@localhost, gnats-admin%NetBSD.org@localhost, 
netbsd-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: kern/44943: 2002::/16 (6to4) addresses are preferred over native 
IPv6 transport
Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 13:37:51 +0200

 On May 8, 2011, at 10:15 , Martin Husemann wrote:
 > This sounds like a misunderstanding.
 
 Sorry for the confusion. So, Mac OS X (before 10.6.6 AFAIK) had this =
 broken behavior, and my random test results gave me what looked like the =
 same behavior on the NetBSD machines I tested on.
 
 > NetBSD itself does not prefer any
 > address over any other. Applications typically just try all results
 > returned by the resolver in the (more or less) random order they =
 arrive.
 
 But IPv6 is AFAIK always preferred over IPv4 on NetBSD, no?
 
 > So this depends mostly on the nameserver answering your question.
 >=20
 > You could check the "sortlist" option in /etc/resolv.conf - but I =
 don't know
 > if/how that works for v6 addresses.
 >=20
 > Besides, why do you realy care?
 
 Then World IPv6 Day (http://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/) comes , content =
 providers will measure the brokenness of IPv6 clients. Even if NetBSD is =
 a small player then it comes to clients, it's better if it would do the =
 correct thing and ignore/de-pref the 6to4 addresses and always prefer =
 native IPv6 over anything else (possibly with the only exception of =
 non-RFC1918 IPv4 addresses.)
 
 So maybe we should close this case?
 I could open a new "feature request" instead...=