Nathan Lay (2009-04-24 20:39 +0200):
>> What are your problems with using radvd? I have used it quite a bit
>> on FreeBSD (6.1) without any hassle. It's even written quite nicely
>> in my experience so working on patches for it should be quite
>> do-able if there are features missing.
>>
> radvd
Matthew Jakeman wrote:
Nathan Lay wrote:
I started playing with IPv6 on my home network with the intent to
transition over. While many things work quite well, IPv6 technology
in general still seems to have some rough edges.
In terms of FreeBSD support, rtadvd and rtsol do not yet support
(e
Steve Bertrand wrote:
Nathan Lay wrote:
I started playing with IPv6 on my home network with the intent to
transition over. While many things work quite well, IPv6 technology in
general still seems to have some rough edges.
I disagree. I believe the "rough edges" do not belong to IPv6,
Bob Van Zant wrote:
What are your problems with using radvd? I have used it quite a bit on
FreeBSD (6.1) without any hassle. It's even written quite nicely in my
experience so working on patches for it should be quite do-able if
there are features missing.
He's saying that the router announce
> To my knowledge this wasn't around when the Kame guys were working on this
> stuff. I don't think a lot of time has been spent updating the v6 support
> applications since then and that's why we don't have this feature.
>
> This isn't a big deal in dual-stack networks because the clients just
What are your problems with using radvd? I have used it quite a bit on
FreeBSD (6.1) without any hassle. It's even written quite nicely in my
experience so working on patches for it should be quite do-able if there
are features missing.
He's saying that the router announcements don't contain a
Nathan Lay wrote:
I started playing with IPv6 on my home network with the intent to
transition over. While many things work quite well, IPv6 technology
in general still seems to have some rough edges.
In terms of FreeBSD support, rtadvd and rtsol do not yet support
(easily? -O option in rtad
sat down to really start thinking about it yet.
-Bob
Message: 14
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 21:14:50 -0400
From: Nathan Lay
Subject: IPv6 Ideas
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <49f1128a.3080...@comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
I started playin
On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, Nathan Lay wrote:
In terms of FreeBSD support, rtadvd and rtsol do not yet support (easily? -O
option in rtadvd/rtsold) RFC5006 (Router Advertisements Option for DNS
Configuration) which make it inconvenient to use mobile devices (like
We'll happily accept a patch;-)
Oh
Nathan Lay wrote:
> I started playing with IPv6 on my home network with the intent to
> transition over. While many things work quite well, IPv6 technology in
> general still seems to have some rough edges.
I disagree. I believe the "rough edges" do not belong to IPv6, the
"rough edges" are the a
I started playing with IPv6 on my home network with the intent to
transition over. While many things work quite well, IPv6 technology in
general still seems to have some rough edges.
In terms of FreeBSD support, rtadvd and rtsol do not yet support
(easily? -O option in rtadvd/rtsold) RFC5006
11 matches
Mail list logo
