On 12-30-19 01:31, FidoNews Robot wrote to All <=-
=================================================================
GENERAL ARTICLES =================================================================
IPv6 in 2019
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
Other than that, 2019 was not all that eventfull regarding IPv6. Not
for Fidonet en not for the Internet in general. We saw steady growth
but we can't say that IPv6 is the dominant protocol yet. Two things
are worth mentioning:
You missed my systems, which now run native IPv6 and now bring IPv4 in over a n OpenVPN tunnel, which runs over IPv6. :) The switch from
using IPv4 to IPv6 to carry the tunnel occurred around a month ago. :)
On 12-30-19 22:09, Terry Roati wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
On Dec 30, 2019 06:06pm, Tony Langdon wrote to FidoNews Robot:
Hi Tony,
You missed my systems, which now run native IPv6 and now bring IPv4 in over a n OpenVPN tunnel, which runs over IPv6. :) The switch from
using IPv4 to IPv6 to carry the tunnel occurred around a month ago. :)
Which RSP are you using?
What settings did you have to change in the router?
Any other settings you have to change?
I am hoping TPG will finally move to IPv6 this coming year.
None, though allowing inbound traffic on the port being used wouldn't
hurt if using UDP. However, I suspect that's unnecessary. The router plays no part in setting up the tunnel (I suspect you're making an assumption that it does).
Again, state your assumptions.
Given that they have owned Internode, who have been offering IPv6 officially (i.e. not a trial) since 2011, and had it on a trial for
some time before then.
Anyway, my network setup is fairly complex with several networks
running on the same wire. The main router only handles the single
static IPv4 and the /56 from Internode. There are a couple of other networks in play.
The IPv4 for the BBSs is handled by an Alix 3d3 running CentOS and OpenVPN. The switch to IPv6 for carrying the data actually simplified things, because I don't need to do any special IPv4 routing - bringing
up the VPN crates the default route. No policy routing or host route
to the other end of the tunnel is needed, because the carrier network
is IPv6.
There's also another router (a R-Pi) for my net44 IP block, and
finally, I do have some ZeroTier virtual LANs running.
On 12-31-19 20:07, Terry Roati wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I was expecting that you would have setup IPv6 in the router and it
would have handled the IPv4 stuff as well.
Again, state your assumptions.
If running windows, did you have tochange the hosts file?
Given that they have owned Internode, who have been offering IPv6 officially (i.e. not a trial) since 2011, and had it on a trial for
some time before then.
That's the mystery, however I get the impression that not all of IInet supports IPv6 also based on what I have read in Whirlpool.
Anyway, my network setup is fairly complex with several networks
running on the same wire. The main router only handles the single
static IPv4 and the /56 from Internode. There are a couple of other networks in play.
Your setup does seem fairly complex but I am sure you have a reason for this.
I just want to run a simple network of 3 PC's, NVR and a NAS. IPv6 will allow me to run more domains which is about it.
You forget, I've had native IPv6 for _years_, so nothing needed to be
done to accommodate the IPv6 transport on my end. It was the other end
of the link that upgraded their server, allowing me to switch to using IPv6 to carry the tunnel.
Windows on...? And I again don't understand the relevance here.
Again, you need to state yur assumptions.
Domains for what? Web servers don't need IPs for extra domains.
On 12-31-19 22:22, Terry Roati wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
On Dec 31, 2019 10:19pm, Tony Langdon wrote to Terry Roati:
Hi Tony,
You forget, I've had native IPv6 for _years_, so nothing needed to be
done to accommodate the IPv6 transport on my end. It was the other end
of the link that upgraded their server, allowing me to switch to using IPv6 to carry the tunnel.
Looks like I have some reading to do :)
Windows on...? And I again don't understand the relevance here.
Again, you need to state yur assumptions.
On a windows network adding the IP's for each machine help speed up internal connections just like a managed switch.
Domains for what? Web servers don't need IPs for extra domains.
I can run virtual domains on Wildcat but I would like to run another domain on my Synology NAS which would be better on a seperate IP for it
to be able to use port 80 also and do mail etc.
| Sysop: | Weed Hopper |
|---|---|
| Location: | Clearwater, FL |
| Users: | 12 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 05:18:52 |
| Calls: | 111 |
| Files: | 50,334 |
| D/L today: |
25 files (3,028K bytes) |
| Messages: | 295,430 |