Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 08 Dec 1998 04:07:31 +0900
From:      Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh <itojun@iijlab.net>
To:        Guido van Rooij <guido@gvr.org>
Cc:        itojun@itojun.org
Subject:   IPv6-over-IPv4 auto tunnel
Message-ID:  <2045.913057651@turmeric.itojun.org>
In-Reply-To: guido's message of Mon, 07 Dec 98 19:35:25 %2B0100. <19981207193525.A18185@gvr.org> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
	I think this may not fit well to hackers, so I added
		reply-to: freebsd-net
	into headers.

>> 	One thing we don't implement intentionally is automatic tunnelling
>> 	(packets to ::10.1.1.1 automatically tunnelled over IPv6-over-IPv4
>> 	tunnel to 10.1.1.1).
>Hmm..what does happen when I have a IPV6/V4 host that has an IPV6
>native address (so no V4 compatible address) that wants to communicate
>to an IPv4 host? Do I need to set up IPV4 specific routes to
>a dual stack machine that does the tunneling for me?

	Your story has nothing to do with auto tunnel.
	Automatic tunnel (::10.1.1.1) is only for communication between two
	IPv4/v6 dual stack hosts.

	For a IPv6-only host (or IPv4/v6 dual stack host without IPv4 address)
	to communicate with IPv4 host, you need to have IPv6-to-IPv4
	translator (TCP relay server like socks or KAME FAITH, or web proxy)
	between two.  There's no magical way.

itojun

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2045.913057651>