The downside still exceeds the upside. Until that equation changes,
there's not enough incentive.
bp
<part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
On 5/2/2016 9:18 AM, Mike Hammett wrote:
Everyone *SHOULD* be caring about IPv6.
-----
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, May 1, 2016 10:18:41 PM
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] DSL Router Recommendations
Yes that'd be double NAT. Who cares about IPv6...
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On May 1, 2016 11:16 PM, "Nate Burke" < [email protected] > wrote:
It seems like the "Official" Solution is to put a 2nd router behind it, then
put that router on a DMZ Address. Wouldn't that mean Double NAT Then? And probably loose
all the IPv6 then.
On 5/1/2016 10:14 PM, Josh Luthman wrote:
Can you just set it to bridge?
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On May 1, 2016 11:13 PM, "Nate Burke" < [email protected] > wrote:
I'm doing work at an office that is fed with AT&T DSL. The AT&T router is a
piece of Garbage. I can't disable the internal DHCP Server, or do any IPV4 port
forwarding (however, it is handing out IPv6 addresses) On the inside of the network, I
already have unifi and Managed switches, so I just need a hardwired DSL router with no
Wifi. Any recommendations for one? I'd love to use a Mikrotik, but I don't think they
ever came out with a Routerboard with a DSL Port did they?
