Did you try apache with IPv6 patch? In that case, IPv6 patch
in the apache and the modssl part can interact in strange ways.
it is not supposed to work.
do you mean intentionally? it is intentionally not working? Or is it
just about modssl requiring an IPv6 patch? My
Bindv9 is prefered. There is some limited support with bindv8 but it
requires significant patching w/ KAME code.
for server side, BIND9 is prefered. for client side, you will be able
to lookup DNS over IPv6 fine, with the following platforms:
FreeBSD 4.1 and
That's what the faith thing does doesn't it? I haven't used it yet.
freebsd faithd(8) is documented in the following internet draft:
draft-ietf-ngtrans-tcpudp-relay-01.txt
itojun
-
The IPv6 Users Mailing List
sorry, at this very moment IPv6 router at the IETF venue is down.
i'll try to recover it in early morning, dec13.
well, don't rush, people can also use one of the tunnel brokers and servers.
One of them is http://www.freenet6.net which is btw on the same lan as the
quake
For gif0 I was using
ifconfig gif0 inet6 A B prefixlen 128 alias
and also tried
ifconfig gif0 inet6 giftunnel A B prefixlen 128 alias
with the same effect.
sorry my mistake. "giftunel" is not necessary.
so correct ones are:
if you are using
%
I am trying to get someone to tell me exactly what the problem is with the
existing DNS servers and why there is any deployment problem. Thus far I
can find nor get any concrete data that anything is wrong. I have
outstanding mail to the DNS chair.
Until someone can provide some concrete data
Therefore IPless virtual hosting is no longer necessary on IPv6 (good for
SSL!).
I thought IPless virtual hosting is no longer necessary due to
HTTP 1.1 Host: header. is my understanding correct?
oops, I wrote it backwards - IPless virtual hosting already works fine
this should be okay.
itojun
#include sys/types.h
#include sys/socket.h
#include stdio.h
#include netdb.h
int
main(argc, argv)
int argc;
char **argv;
{
char hbuf[NI_MAXHOST];
struct addrinfo hints, *res;
int error;
#ifdef NI_WITHSCOPEID
just checking, of course you have configured "alpha" side too?
huh? i did the configuration on alpha, not on ph-sfc-sat (the
other endpoint)? should i do "gifconfig" on both ends?
you need to configure both ends.
itojun
Because I am not sure all *bsd have same method to hook a ip packet.
Do all *bsd have ipfw in this case ? I know IPFilter is implemented
to FreeBSD, NetBSD and OpenBSD. But it cannot handle a ipv6 packet
accurately.
the code path is different between *BSD - yes, painful for us kame
I have still not heard any reason for the varargs here..
except it's needed for portability..
portability with WHO?
portability with other *BSD projects (NetBSD, OpenBSD, BSD/OS, MacOSX
maybe).
BSD4.4 certainly didn't have varargs there
4.4BSD did not have
We are planning to fill your (and many freebsd hackers') requirements.
just a nitpicking.
- i don't think julian is in the position to set the requirement
for freebsd. is he?
- i have never heard from other people about (against) the use of
varargs,
Now the host get its IPv6-IP by router solicitation, and that's nice,
there seems to be no configuration for the nodes, BUT...
How can my nameserver know which IPv6-IP eva has. Should it be
configured manually? What are then the advantages of rtavdd en rtsold?
I thought the idea was that
Kame NATPT translation mechanism is a bidirectional mechanism?
no. just like IPv4 NAT, it is unidirectional, and IPv6-to-IPv4 only.
(you cannot identify IPv6 host from IPv4 host)
itojun
-
The IPv6 Users
It appears to me we can resolve the situation in either of two ways:
1. Get two more /64s, tunneled behind two mode static IPv4 addresses,
and route the two new /64 blocks into our DMZ and test networks
respectively.
2. Upgrade our /64 to a /48, then allocate three /64 subnets from
I have a problem with routing and ipv6.
Consider the following senario: i have three PCs setup in a chain (A - B -
C ). All PCs do only have one NIC.
(snip)
so in your configuration, A, B and C are all on the same link but
A and C has to use B as the gateway. B would send
does anybody have IPv6 plans/status lists for content distribution
providers, like Akamai?
I happened to be in Boston this week and I can visit Akamai if
there's a contact point, as a preacher:-)
itojun
... or if Rich's default router selection draft is adopted, you could at
least configure your site routers with high priority to outvote the
default medium priority, which would help were it a real accident.
it does not work when people misconfigures a router with high
18 matches
Mail list logo
