[135261] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT-PT or NAT64 in real life
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Wed Jan 19 04:27:18 2011
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 10:26:31 +0100 (CET)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: jarod smith <jarod.smouth@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik1twjfBnhcyLYvx+RBHs63hi2siCE6R9SLMgfv@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011, jarod smith wrote:
> Are some of you have installed one of these two implementations in
> production on recent versions of linux? Is it stable, secure, ... ?
Not in production, but we've installed it for testing. We immediately ran
into problems that was MTU related where viagenie mismatched the 2 byte
MTU in IPv4 with 4 byte in IPv6 and didn't handle that. After reporting
this we quickly received a patch that fixed the problem.
They also seem to have other fixes not available in the public
distribution (this was a month ago, might have changed).
So my take on this is that viagenie responds well to mail and will fix
things, but the software has not been widely tested and is not production
quality right now.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
