Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-06-11 Thread Michael Widerkrantz
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Nathan Lay
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Nathan Lay
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,

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Matthew Jakeman
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread sthaug
> 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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Bob Van Zant
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Matthew Jakeman
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Bob Van Zant
I was in a similar position to you not that long ago. I got my LAN all dual stack and was a happy camper. I wanted 100% IPv6 and never to see another RFC 1918 address on my network again. Unfortunately it's just not practical. My ReadyNAS doesn't talk v6. My mac doesn't appear to like v6 for the fi

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Bjoern A. Zeeb
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

Re: IPv6 Ideas

2009-04-24 Thread Steve Bertrand
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