Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Lu, 17 iun 19, 10:05:11, mick crane wrote: > hello, > I know nothing about IPv6. Then you don't have any prejudices ;) (no, IPv6 doesn't break your network). > Can somebody point to a good explanation ? > Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request an IPv6 > range

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Thursday 27 June 2019 16:37:20 Dennis Wicks wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote on 6/17/19 11:49 AM: > > On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > > [big snip!] And short of commenting every > > > line in /e/i.d/avahi-* out, I don't know how to stop that PITA from > > [/big snip] > > >

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene Heskett wrote on 6/17/19 11:49 AM: On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: [big snip!] And short of commenting every line in /e/i.d/avahi-* out, I don't know how to stop that PITA from [/big snip] Cheers, Gene Heskett Gene; No need for such butchery! Just insert a

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 06:37:25PM +, Andy Smith wrote: On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:34:52PM +, Andy Smith wrote: That is why the stance that, "I have IPv4 so I don't need to do anything" is not completely correct: it's not urgent for much of the world at present, but we will get into a

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 07:34:52PM +, Andy Smith wrote: > That is why the stance that, "I have IPv4 so I don't need to do > anything" is not completely correct: it's not urgent for much of the > world at present, but we will get into a situation where either one > or both sides of a given IP

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Sat 22 Jun 2019 at 20:45:59 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: > On 22/06/19 3:01 PM, David Wright wrote: > > On Wed 19 Jun 2019 at 04:23:15 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: > >> On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: > >>> On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > >> > But

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 23/06/2019 à 08:27, Gene Heskett a écrit : On Saturday 22 June 2019 22:49:36 John Hasler wrote: Gene writes: Well, I'd expect there is a registration fee... ...particularly since it may take a whole cluster of servers to cover locally, the whole ipv6 address space. I don't know what you

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Saturday 22 June 2019 22:49:36 John Hasler wrote: > Gene writes: > > Well, I'd expect there is a registration fee... > > From https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/ > > Internet Service Providers (ISPs) > > Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are allocated IP addresses for >

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene writes: > Well, I'd expect there is a registration fee... >From https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/ Internet Service Providers (ISPs) Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are allocated IP addresses for distribution to the users of their Internet services. The fee

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Saturday 22 June 2019 17:32:54 John Hasler wrote: > Gene writes: > > He no doubt has to buy the block of ipv6 addresses before his dhcpd > > v6 can pass them out. > > No one buys IPv6 addresses. There is no competition for them. They > are allocated, and your ISP almost certainly already has

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene writes: > He no doubt has to buy the block of ipv6 addresses before his dhcpd v6 > can pass them out. No one buys IPv6 addresses. There is no competition for them. They are allocated, and your ISP almost certainly already has an allocation even if they haven't registered it yet.

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Saturday 22 June 2019 15:34:52 Andy Smith wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:01:47PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > On Wed 19 Jun 2019 at 04:23:15 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: > > > On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: > > > > On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote:

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Fri, Jun 21, 2019 at 10:01:47PM -0500, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 19 Jun 2019 at 04:23:15 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: > > On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: > > > On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > > > >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 22/06/19 3:01 PM, David Wright wrote: > On Wed 19 Jun 2019 at 04:23:15 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: >> On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: >>> On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Wed 19 Jun 2019 at 04:23:15 (+1200), Richard Hector wrote: > On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: > > On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > > >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > >> ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:49:10PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: 127.0.0.0/8 is for loopback addresses; ::1 is the IPv6 equivalent. Reserved ranges for local use are the RFC1918 ranges (192.168.0.0/16, 172.16.0.0/12 and 10.0.0.0/8), and more closely replaced by ULAs (fd00::/8) in IPv6. Yes

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 08:33:07PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Le 18/06/2019 à 18:19, Reco a écrit : > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:45:59PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > > > Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : > > > > > > > > The problem can be 'solved' by announcing specific

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:44 PM Erwan David wrote: > > When you know that classless routing is older than classes were when > CIDR appeared... > ...then you stop worrying whether or not you can grok IPV6 :-D Or you post questions about esoteric protocols just to stump the younger

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 20/06/2019 à 20:33, Pascal Hambourg a écrit : > Le 18/06/2019 à 18:19, Reco a écrit : >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:45:59PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: >>> Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : The problem can be 'solved' by announcing specific IP routes to each and

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Please remove me from this email chain. On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 2:33 PM Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Le 18/06/2019 à 18:19, Reco a écrit : > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:45:59PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > >> Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : > >>> > >>> The problem can be 'solved' by

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 18/06/2019 à 18:19, Reco a écrit : On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:45:59PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : The problem can be 'solved' by announcing specific IP routes to each and every host on both sites. Yes, it's gross. Not all hosts accept route

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:23 AM Richard Hector wrote: > > If you never try setting it up, when do you expect to understand it? And > I see IPv6 on my side of the modem; I suspect many others do too. I > expect you'll get it sooner or later. > A few weeks ago a took a position in the world's

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 19/06/19 4:12 AM, David Wright wrote: > On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign >> ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, >> what if I have an address clash with

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 04:17:55AM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > On 19/06/19 2:11 AM, Reco wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:47:08PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > >> On 18/06/19 10:32 PM, Reco wrote: > > >> > >> Custom routes? When routing between 2 networks using the same

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:32:23AM -0500, Nicholas Geovanis wrote: > Guten Morgen, > > > > But this RFC's "random" cannot mean "I start each day with selecting > > new, custom /64 IPv6 ULA prefix for my site". ipv6calc fills this > > nicely, try it some day. > > > > By RFC 4193, it

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 04:45:59PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : > > > > > > Custom routes? When routing between 2 networks using the same range, > > > either with a VPN or some kind of direct connection? It's going to need > > > some evil double NAT

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 19/06/19 2:11 AM, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:47:08PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: >> On 18/06/19 10:32 PM, Reco wrote: >> >> Custom routes? When routing between 2 networks using the same range, >> either with a VPN or some kind of direct connection? It's going to

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Mon 17 Jun 2019 at 10:38:27 (-0400), Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 17 June 2019 05:59:52 am Jonathan Dowland wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: > > >Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request > > > an IPv6 range from my ISP to use

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:11 AM Reco wrote: > Hi. > Guten Morgen, > But this RFC's "random" cannot mean "I start each day with selecting > new, custom /64 IPv6 ULA prefix for my site". ipv6calc fills this > nicely, try it some day. > By RFC 4193, it must/should be pseudo-random

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 18/06/2019 à 16:11, Reco a écrit : Custom routes? When routing between 2 networks using the same range, either with a VPN or some kind of direct connection? It's going to need some evil double NAT sorcery, especially if the same actual addresses are in use on both. As long as: a) It's L3

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:47:08PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > On 18/06/19 10:32 PM, Reco wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:56:17PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > >> On 18/06/19 3:38 AM, Reco wrote: > >>> Hi. > >>> > >>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:38:27AM

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 17/06/2019 à 17:39, Curt Howland a écrit : Yes, IPv6 does have such allocations. The first 64bits is network block, then the last 64bits are your local machine. Unless you want to enable SLAAC which requires 64+64, you can select different sizes for the network the host parts. Your

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 18/06/2019 à 14:46, Greg Wooledge a écrit : On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 02:39:53PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: Le 17/06/2019 à 19:00, Dan Ritter a écrit : sudo apt remove avahi* This may raise some dependency issues. Here : The following packages will be REMOVED: adwaita-icon-theme

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 02:39:53PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote: > Le 17/06/2019 à 19:00, Dan Ritter a écrit : > > > > sudo apt remove avahi* > > This may raise some dependency issues. Here : > > The following packages will be REMOVED: > adwaita-icon-theme avahi-daemon bochs bochs-term

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Le 17/06/2019 à 19:00, Dan Ritter a écrit : sudo apt remove avahi* This may raise some dependency issues. Here : The following packages will be REMOVED: adwaita-icon-theme avahi-daemon bochs bochs-term bochs-x ca-certificates-java colord default-jre default-jre-headless epdfview

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 18/06/19 10:32 PM, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:56:17PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: >> On 18/06/19 3:38 AM, Reco wrote: >>> Hi. >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:38:27AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: But that opens yet another container of worms. If I

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 09:56:17PM +1200, Richard Hector wrote: > On 18/06/19 3:38 AM, Reco wrote: > > Hi. > > > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:38:27AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > >> ipv6 local addresses,

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 18/06/19 3:38 AM, Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:38:27AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: >> But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign >> ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, >> what if I have an address clash

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 17/06/19 9:59 PM, Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: >> Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request an >> IPv6 range from my ISP to use locally. > > You don't need a global IPv6 address allocation in order to have local

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

> On Monday 17 June 2019, Gene Heskett was heard > to say: > >> How is that resolved, by unroutable address blocks such >> as 192.168.xx.xx is now? > > Yes, IPv6 does have such allocations. The first 64bits is network > block, then the last 64bits are your local machine. > > fc00:: is the

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi there On 17/06/2019 12:11, Aidan Gauland wrote: On 17/06/19 9:09 PM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: hello, I know nothing about IPv6. Can somebody point to a good explanation ? I'd recommend skimming the relevant Wikipedia [1] page.

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

I wrote: > In addition to the points made by others, the IPv6 address space is so > large that were you to assign a random IPv6 address to every computer in > existence (including all the embedded systems) the probability of a > collision would be negligible. dsr writes: > ... but only if you

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Thanks! On Monday, June 17, 2019 08:34:01 PM Gene Heskett wrote: > namecheap.com, just a few bucks for a 5 year registration of a fixed > address, now on another 5 year renewal: > from my sig: > Genes Web page > gene@coyote:~$ ping geneslinuxbox.net > PING

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 07:59:51 pm rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, June 17, 2019 01:05:54 PM Gene Heskett wrote: > > I am lucky, my ISP uses the connecting MAC to translate to a fixed > > ipv4, that has not changed in 6 years. So my web page address in my > > sig has not changed in 6 years

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 02:24:47 pm John Hasler wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily > > assign ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of > > the router, what if I have an address clash with someone on a > > satellite

Re: SOLVED was IPv4 v IPv6 discussion that went off the rails.

On Monday 17 June 2019 01:02:54 pm Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:00:53PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote: > > sudo apt remove avahi* > > The * needs to be quoted (backslash is one form of quoting) so the > shell won't expand it. I fixed it finally. running totally blind as I could

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday, June 17, 2019 01:05:54 PM Gene Heskett wrote: > I am lucky, my ISP uses the connecting MAC to translate to a fixed ipv4, > that has not changed in 6 years. So my web page address in my sig has > not changed in 6 years even if I swap the router as my standby unit has > the good ones MAC

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hello, On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 04:11:32PM -0400, Robin Hammond wrote: > The size of such a routing table gives me nightmares ! Thank goodness you > have to advertise networks of a reasonably sized prefix length! I wouldn't worry too much about the number of v6 routes. In terms of addressing and

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

The size of such a routing table gives me nightmares ! Thank goodness you have to advertise networks of a reasonably sized prefix length! On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:07, Dan Ritter wrote: > John Hasler wrote: > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

John Hasler wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > > ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, > > what if I have an address clash with someone on a satellite circuit in > > Ulan Bator. How is

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene Heskett wrote: > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, > what if I have an address clash with someone on a satellite circuit in > Ulan Bator. How is that resolved, by unroutable

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 01:00:53 pm Dan Ritter wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > > > > I have for eth0, two scope global addresses in a new stretch install > > of an r-pi-3b, one from avahi and one from e/n/i.d/eth0, but the > > instant it goes

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 17 June 2019 01:00:53 pm Dan Ritter wrote: > > > Gene Heskett wrote: > > > On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > > > > > > I have for eth0, two scope global addresses in a new stretch install > > > of an r-pi-3b, one from avahi and one from

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 01:00:53 pm Dan Ritter wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > > > > I have for eth0, two scope global addresses in a new stretch install > > of an r-pi-3b, one from avahi and one from e/n/i.d/eth0, but the > > instant it goes

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 11:39:12 am Curt Howland wrote: > On Monday 17 June 2019, Gene Heskett was heard > > to say: > > How is that resolved, by unroutable address blocks such > > as 192.168.xx.xx is now? > > Yes, IPv6 does have such allocations. The first 64bits is network > block, then the

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 01:00:53PM -0400, Dan Ritter wrote: > sudo apt remove avahi* The * needs to be quoted (backslash is one form of quoting) so the shell won't expand it.

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene Heskett wrote: > On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > > I have for eth0, two scope global addresses in a new stretch install of > an r-pi-3b, one from avahi and one from e/n/i.d/eth0, but the instant it > goes global, it sends from the avahi address 169.etc. Since thats

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily > > assign ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of > > the router, what if I have an address clash with someone on a > > satellite

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 10:54:19 am Dan Ritter wrote: > Gene Heskett wrote: > > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily > > assign ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of > > the router, what if I have an address clash with someone on a > > satellite

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Monday 17 June 2019, Gene Heskett was heard to say: > How is that resolved, by unroutable address blocks such > as 192.168.xx.xx is now? Yes, IPv6 does have such allocations. The first 64bits is network block, then the last 64bits are your

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Hi. On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:38:27AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, > what if I have an address clash with someone on a satellite circuit in

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

Gene Heskett wrote: > But that opens yet another container of worms. If I arbitrarily assign > ipv6 local addresses, and later, ipv6 shows up at my side of the router, > what if I have an address clash with someone on a satellite circuit in > Ulan Bator. How is that resolved, by unroutable

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Monday 17 June 2019 05:59:52 am Jonathan Dowland wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: > >Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request > > an IPv6 range from my ISP to use locally. > > You don't need a global IPv6 address allocation in

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On 17/06/19 9:09 PM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: >> hello, >> I know nothing about IPv6. >> Can somebody point to a good explanation ? > I'd recommend skimming the relevant Wikipedia [1] page. > > Cheers > > [1]

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request an IPv6 range from my ISP to use locally. You don't need a global IPv6 address allocation in order to have local IPv6 addresses. Much like 127.0.0.0/8 (etc.) for IPv4

Re: IPv4 v IPv6

On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 10:05:11AM +0100, mick crane wrote: > hello, > I know nothing about IPv6. > Can somebody point to a good explanation ? I'd recommend skimming the relevant Wikipedia [1] page. Cheers [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6 -- t signature.asc Description: Digital

IPv4 v IPv6

hello, I know nothing about IPv6. Can somebody point to a good explanation ? Without knowing anything about it I'm wondering if I should request an IPv6 range from my ISP to use locally. A network card have IPv4 and IPv6 addresses that are different, not the same address in different notation ?