[181798] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mel Beckman)
Sun Jul 5 09:55:30 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org>
To: Josh Moore <jmoore@atcnetworks.net>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 2015 13:55:20 +0000
In-Reply-To: <002EE633-F368-49C2-9BEA-CCC2608D57AC@atcnetworks.net>
Cc: "johnl@iecc.com" <johnl@iecc.com>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
>=20
> Josh Moore wrote:
>=20
> Tunnels behind a CPE and 4to6 NAT seem like bandaid fixes as they do not =
give the benefit of true end to end IPv6 connectivity in the sense of every=
device has a one to one global address mapping.
No, tunnels do give you one to one global IPv6 address mapping for every de=
vice. From a testing perspective, a tunnelbroker works just as if you had =
a second IPv6-only ISP. If you're fortunate enough to have a dual-stack ISP=
already, you can forgo tunneling altogether and just use an IPv6-capable b=
order firewall.=20
William Waites wrote:
> I was helping my
> friend who likes Apple things connect to the local community
> network. He wanted to use an Airport as his home gateway rather than
> the router that we normally use. Turns out these things can *only* do
> IPv6 with tunnels and cannot do IPv6 on PPPoE. Go figure. So there is
> not exactly a clear path to native IPv6 for your lab this way.
Nobody is recommending the Apple router as a border firewall. It's terrible=
for that. But it's a ready-to-go tunnelbroker gateway. If your ISP can't d=
eliver IPv6, tunneling is the clear path to building a lab. If you have a d=
ual-stack ISP already, the clear path is to use an IPv6-capable border fire=
wall.=20
So you are in a maze of non-twisty paths, all alike :)=
