On Tue, 11 May 2004 18:59:31 +0900 Ume wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 6 May 2004 10:21:13 +0200 >>>>> Lukasz Stelmach said:
Lukasz>> Well i *have*got* one v4ADDR that is assigned to my nat/router-box. I [...] Lukasz>> harm. Let's say taht to the rest of the world the nat+TIGGER act like Lukasz>> a single machine. > Yes, current if_stf is too restrictive against NAT, and skipping > certain checks enablea us to use 6to4 even behind NAT. I believe it > doesn't break RFC3056. IMHO it does not if everything is going to be corect after the packets go touring out of nat. > Once, I made a patch to do so for a friend of mine. But, it was based > on old source and somewhat redundant. I've just made a patch against > recent 5-CURRENT. But, I've not estimated if there are side effects. > I don't have testing environment for 6to4, now. Could you test it? In one of my previous letters I have mentioned that i use 4.9-RCsomething and unfortunately this is my only FreeBSD. I am also afraid :-( that i don't have enough spare time neither. But please send the patch and I will *try* to look at it if you don't mind. Bye. -- |/ |_, _ .- --, Już z każdej strony pełzną, potworne żądze |__ |_|. | \ |_|. ._' /_. Będę uprawiał nierząd, za pieniąze
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
