On 14/03/14 00:21, Marco Sommani marcosomm...@gmail.com wrote:
AVM is not alone in its choices: they just do what is suggested in RFC
6092 - Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in Customer Premises
Equipment (CPE) for Providing Residential IPv6 Internet Service. I don't
like what they do,
On 14/mar/2014, at 07:08, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) evyn...@cisco.com wrote:
On 14/03/14 00:21, Marco Sommani marcosomm...@gmail.com wrote:
AVM is not alone in its choices: they just do what is suggested in RFC
6092 - Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in Customer Premises
Equipment
Apologies for the staggered reply.
Another note, RFC 6092 is about IPv6 behavior. If our Teredo traffic is
de-encapsulated, one will notice the traffic carries IPsec, which unambiguously
should be allowed by section 3.2.4.
That's a theoretical point really, I don't expect (or necessarily even
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 10:44:17PM +, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote:
Or is it because AVM blocks all inbound IPv6 connection and X/Box has no
choice but falling back on Teredo?
I am really unclear on the exact situation
No, AVM blocks *Teredo*.
Native IPv6 is permitted according to
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 07:17:16PM -0500, David Farmer wrote:
They prefer native IPv6, but only if all the peer-to-peer participants
also have native IPv6. So, if all your gamer buddies have native IPv6,
then native IPv6 is preferred. They do not want to use Teredo Gateways.
So,
On 14 Mar 2014, at 00:50, SM s...@resistor.net wrote:
Hi Marco,
At 16:21 13-03-2014, Marco Sommani wrote:
AVM is not alone in its choices: they just do what is suggested in RFC 6092
- Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in Customer Premises Equipment
(CPE) for Providing Residential
