From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri May 20 08:18:47 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37C68B42B86 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 08:18:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mark.tinka@seacom.mu) Received: from the-host.seacom.mu (ge-1.ln-01-jnb.za.seacomnet.com [105.28.96.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C48821043 for ; Fri, 20 May 2016 08:18:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mark.tinka@seacom.mu) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=Mark-Tinkas-MacBook.local) by the-host.seacom.mu with esmtp (Exim 4.82_1-5b7a7c0-XX) (envelope-from ) id O7GV37-0002JI-2K for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 20 May 2016 10:18:43 +0200 Subject: Re: tinc and IPv6 routing, or: how to set up a local IPv6 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20160519124446.GB2444@box-fra-01.niklaas.eu> <04e2cb6c-f8c3-7d30-dd53-ca18870c4598@seacom.mu> <20160520065857.GA59066@box-fra-01.niklaas.eu> <545832b8-d7df-9858-82c4-dfe9cc4c7023@seacom.mu> <20160520072052.GB59066@box-fra-01.niklaas.eu> From: Mark Tinka Message-ID: <259f3563-b943-b75f-5d4b-92d3d39aa0ca@seacom.mu> Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 10:18:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160520072052.GB59066@box-fra-01.niklaas.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 08:18:47 -0000 On 20/May/16 09:20, Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff wrote: > Yes, they have. But that's not the one I want to use for the VPN. I would > like to use ULAs. So I went to http://unique-local-ipv6.com/ and generated > some randomly: fd16:dcc0:f4cc::/48 So, while both machines use the > assigned addresses to communicate with the public internet, the ULA space > I would like to use for the machines to communicate within the VPN. Does > that make sense? Well, that is what ULA's are for, but to be honest, I use GUA's for both my public and private networks. I know ULA's mimics RFC 1918, but I don't believe in NAT66, so I've never tried ULA's. I think your issue might somewhat be influenced by the use of ULA's. Mark.