lux-integ wrote: > Greetings > > I caught the linux bug in 1999. and I have been a fan of LFS/CLFS/BLFS for at > least a decade. From my early days of linux I have been hearing about ipv6. > But it appears not many people are using it (STILL). AND there are business > interests who have invested in the moribund-ipv4-status quo (for > example microsoft has recently paid some $8.5bn for unusable-with-ipv6-skype ) > Even our beloved LFS/CLFS/BLFS seem welded to ipv4 which is set to be > obsoleted sooner than we think. > > Has anyone on list tried ipv6 and blfs and what are the results? > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYffYT2y-Iw
Whether to use ipv4 or ipv6 really depends on the ISP. Generally an office only needs one address and then uses NAT (network address translation) internally. NAT multiplexes a single address into many. Any office can use private IP addresses internally (192.168.x.x, 10.x.x.x, 172.16,x,x) and one ipv4 (or ipv6) externally. On the other hand, LFS does handle ipv6. I know the kernel, glibc, iproute2, bind, and iptables support it. Some older tools do not. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
