Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 May 2016 11:01:18 +0200
From:      Niklaas Baudet von Gersdorff <stdin@niklaas.eu>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: tinc and IPv6 routing, or: how to set up a local IPv6
Message-ID:  <20160520090118.GA26491@box-fra-01.niklaas.eu>
In-Reply-To: <259f3563-b943-b75f-5d4b-92d3d39aa0ca@seacom.mu>
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> <259f3563-b943-b75f-5d4b-92d3d39aa0ca@seacom.mu>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Mark Tinka [2016-05-20 10:18 +0200] :

> 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.

OK, thanks for the advice. I haven't grasped how IPv6 works completely
yet. So, NAT66 is for prefix rewriting, right? Where would I need that?
Simple routing (as I tried to achieve) doesn't work here?

> I think your issue might somewhat be influenced by the use of ULA's.

I just stumbled over https://wiki.freebsd.org/IPv6TODO. Would you
recommend to wait with what I am trying to achieve? I mean, the VPN works
for IPv4, so I can let the servers communicate via v4 and not v6. Does
that have any disadvantages? I mean, shouldn't we all get IPv6-ready?

Thanks for sharing your experience.

    Niklaas



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160520090118.GA26491>