Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Butch, No, I'm not on the IPv6 mailing list. I'll check it out. Thanks! Greg On Jan 16, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Butch Evans wrote: On 01/13/2011 05:54 PM, Greg Ihnen wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg, are you on the IPv6 mailing list? I posted a complete configuration there (very simple config) for MT with an HE tunnel. I believe that most of that post was put up on the member's wiki, though I can't be certain. It will work with any MT device (including 750). -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Yes, there is a full config on the wiki and some comments I wrote as I did the implementation. Butch's configuration is there. HE also has some of the configuration for MT on their website. On 1/16/2011 12:05 AM, Butch Evans wrote: On 01/13/2011 05:54 PM, Greg Ihnen wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg, are you on the IPv6 mailing list? I posted a complete configuration there (very simple config) for MT with an HE tunnel. I believe that most of that post was put up on the member's wiki, though I can't be certain. It will work with any MT device (including 750). -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
At 1/15/2011 11:56 PM, ButchE wrote: On 01/13/2011 09:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. Perhaps personal opinion, but bad advice. Obviously we have different opinions. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. Have you even tried explaining how to configure their email client? Explaining IPv6 would be much harder. You make my point. IPv6 is needless complexity that doesn't solve the real problems while focusing on a non-problem that it doesn't solve anyway. The only folks who would put up an IPv6-only site are a) Chinese (and we don't really care), or b) zealots who think they are on a mission from some diety to follow the advice of the IETF. Anyone wanting to put up a site for the public will make it available on v4, and that is how the transition is planned to work. So the average Joe who calls up and asks about how to configure Windows Mail or what-have-you will have no need for v6. They won't know the difference, and won't need to connect to zealot sites. Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. Umm...IPv6 is not a Cisco fantasy. While I agree that there are some serious problems with the current implementation, I cannot say that it is a total waste. There are some security issues to be sure, but for the most part, it works and works well. It reminds me of the beer commercial, in reverse: Tastes worse, more filling. Yes, it works, but not as well as v4. Billions of dollars of transition cost will result in negligible improvement. Collossal waste, especially considering how they went out of their way to *not* fix things that were really broken. In 1991, the public Internet didn't exist yet, so it was all a little club with little concern about massive cybercrime. But it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
On 01/16/2011 01:07 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/15/2011 11:56 PM, ButchE wrote: On 01/13/2011 09:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. Perhaps personal opinion, but bad advice. Obviously we have different opinions. Opinion isn't the key to this. It is FACT that IPv6 is here and WILL need to be implemented. There is, in the very near future, going to be some content that WILL be reachable via IPv6 only. It may not be this year or next, but ignore it and it will go away is bad advice. It isn't a matter of opinion. THAT was my point. You make my point. IPv6 is needless complexity that doesn't solve the real problems while focusing on a non-problem that it doesn't solve anyway. The point is that WHEN content is reachable only via IPv6, whether via some transition mechanism or native implementation, customers WILL want it. Complexity isn't the problem. Your statement to let the customers worry with it is what I was addressing. Which non-problem are you referring to? Lack of currently allocatable space? The fact that there is still lots of unused (yet allocated) space really is an issue, whether you like it (or admit it) or not. And if that IS the issue you are referring to, IPv6 DOES address and fix that issue. The only folks who would put up an IPv6-only site are a) Chinese (and we don't really care), or b) zealots who think they are on a mission from some diety to follow the advice of the IETF. Anyone wanting to put up a site for the public will make it available on v4, and that is how the transition is planned to work. So the average Joe who calls up and asks about how to configure Windows Mail or what-have-you will have no need for v6. They won't know the difference, and won't need to connect to zealot sites. So you are basing your opinions on the fact that since the content is unimportant to you, it is assumed to be unimportant to your customers? It reminds me of the beer commercial, in reverse: Tastes worse, more filling. Yes, it works, but not as well as v4. Billions of dollars of transition cost will result in negligible improvement. Collossal waste, especially considering how they went out of their way to *not* fix things that were really broken. In 1991, the public Internet didn't exist yet, so it was all a little club with little concern about massive cybercrime. But it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Well, high horse aside, your advice to ignore it and it will go away seems to be nulled by this opinion that it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Perhaps you don't really believe that it will go away? If that is the case, why would you provide that as your advised approach? As a consultant, it seems to me that our advice should be published with the best interest of our customers in mind and not our personal beefs, which yours seems to be on this subject. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1999-09-10/ I think I missed Friday. While I agree v6 is a crap pile, it also is going to be implemented and far sooner then some people think. Not that my source is all authoritative on the subject, it was a conversation with a cellular tech support. His claim is that $employer will be moving to a v6 network asap. They already run deep NAT on everything have hundreds of complaints about broken VPNs daily (the same subject of my call). The crazy part of their network is that it was not even consistent NAting. One tower hands out 192.168.0.0/16's that then NAT to a 10.x then the public proxy, while down the road you skip the 192 and get a 10.x directly. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Butch Evans but...@butchevans.com wrote: On 01/16/2011 01:07 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/15/2011 11:56 PM, ButchE wrote: On 01/13/2011 09:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. Perhaps personal opinion, but bad advice. Obviously we have different opinions. Opinion isn't the key to this. It is FACT that IPv6 is here and WILL need to be implemented. There is, in the very near future, going to be some content that WILL be reachable via IPv6 only. It may not be this year or next, but ignore it and it will go away is bad advice. It isn't a matter of opinion. THAT was my point. You make my point. IPv6 is needless complexity that doesn't solve the real problems while focusing on a non-problem that it doesn't solve anyway. The point is that WHEN content is reachable only via IPv6, whether via some transition mechanism or native implementation, customers WILL want it. Complexity isn't the problem. Your statement to let the customers worry with it is what I was addressing. Which non-problem are you referring to? Lack of currently allocatable space? The fact that there is still lots of unused (yet allocated) space really is an issue, whether you like it (or admit it) or not. And if that IS the issue you are referring to, IPv6 DOES address and fix that issue. The only folks who would put up an IPv6-only site are a) Chinese (and we don't really care), or b) zealots who think they are on a mission from some diety to follow the advice of the IETF. Anyone wanting to put up a site for the public will make it available on v4, and that is how the transition is planned to work. So the average Joe who calls up and asks about how to configure Windows Mail or what-have-you will have no need for v6. They won't know the difference, and won't need to connect to zealot sites. So you are basing your opinions on the fact that since the content is unimportant to you, it is assumed to be unimportant to your customers? It reminds me of the beer commercial, in reverse: Tastes worse, more filling. Yes, it works, but not as well as v4. Billions of dollars of transition cost will result in negligible improvement. Collossal waste, especially considering how they went out of their way to *not* fix things that were really broken. In 1991, the public Internet didn't exist yet, so it was all a little club with little concern about massive cybercrime. But it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Well, high horse aside, your advice to ignore it and it will go away seems to be nulled by this opinion that it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Perhaps you don't really believe that it will go away? If that is the case, why would you provide that as your advised approach? As a consultant, it seems to me that our advice should be published with the best interest of our customers in mind and not our personal beefs, which yours seems to be on this subject. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives:
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I must have missed something along the way. I keep seeing postings here that IPv6 is worthless, yet when I read the posts on NANOG, ARIN and IETF mail lists, it is a viable and in production protocol. So, would some one please post the *facts *that make IPv6 so bad. On 1/16/2011 2:51 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1999-09-10/ I think I missed Friday. While I agree v6 is a crap pile, it also is going to be implemented and far sooner then some people think. Not that my source is all authoritative on the subject, it was a conversation with a cellular tech support. His claim is that $employer will be moving to a v6 network asap. They already run deep NAT on everything have hundreds of complaints about broken VPNs daily (the same subject of my call). The crazy part of their network is that it was not even consistent NAting. One tower hands out 192.168.0.0/16's that then NAT to a 10.x then the public proxy, while down the road you skip the 192 and get a 10.x directly. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Butch Evansbut...@butchevans.com wrote: On 01/16/2011 01:07 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/15/2011 11:56 PM, ButchE wrote: On 01/13/2011 09:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. Perhaps personal opinion, but bad advice. Obviously we have different opinions. Opinion isn't the key to this. It is FACT that IPv6 is here and WILL need to be implemented. There is, in the very near future, going to be some content that WILL be reachable via IPv6 only. It may not be this year or next, but ignore it and it will go away is bad advice. It isn't a matter of opinion. THAT was my point. You make my point. IPv6 is needless complexity that doesn't solve the real problems while focusing on a non-problem that it doesn't solve anyway. The point is that WHEN content is reachable only via IPv6, whether via some transition mechanism or native implementation, customers WILL want it. Complexity isn't the problem. Your statement to let the customers worry with it is what I was addressing. Which non-problem are you referring to? Lack of currently allocatable space? The fact that there is still lots of unused (yet allocated) space really is an issue, whether you like it (or admit it) or not. And if that IS the issue you are referring to, IPv6 DOES address and fix that issue. The only folks who would put up an IPv6-only site are a) Chinese (and we don't really care), or b) zealots who think they are on a mission from some diety to follow the advice of the IETF. Anyone wanting to put up a site for the public will make it available on v4, and that is how the transition is planned to work. So the average Joe who calls up and asks about how to configure Windows Mail or what-have-you will have no need for v6. They won't know the difference, and won't need to connect to zealot sites. So you are basing your opinions on the fact that since the content is unimportant to you, it is assumed to be unimportant to your customers? It reminds me of the beer commercial, in reverse: Tastes worse, more filling. Yes, it works, but not as well as v4. Billions of dollars of transition cost will result in negligible improvement. Collossal waste, especially considering how they went out of their way to *not* fix things that were really broken. In 1991, the public Internet didn't exist yet, so it was all a little club with little concern about massive cybercrime. But it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Well, high horse aside, your advice to ignore it and it will go away seems to be nulled by this opinion that it will result in a lot of new box sales for Cisco. Perhaps you don't really believe that it will go away? If that is the case, why would you provide that as your advised approach? As a consultant, it seems to me that our advice should be published with the best interest of our customers in mind and not our personal beefs, which yours seems to be on this subject. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today!
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
It is a protocol wonk holy war :-) IPv6 is worse OSI is better Using the definition from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better Does not matter to me because I have customers that need end-to-end connectivity to China and mobile data in the US (that is going native v6 with v4 NAT) so I'm deploying IPv6. There are certainty interesting aspects to the side Fred is on, as indicated, I believe, in this book: http://amzn.to/gHQDax. I'm still reading it so no comment there. They have interesting ideas but they would be better off building a overlay network stack ala Skype (P2P network stack, not the voip program) for app developers, IMO. The simple fact is I have customers that want IPv6 and they give me money to provide it. If someone wants to give me money to tunnel their NetBUI traffic over the internet I'll do that as well. On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Scott Reed sr...@nwwnet.net wrote: I must have missed something along the way. I keep seeing postings here that IPv6 is worthless, yet when I read the posts on NANOG, ARIN and IETF mail lists, it is a viable and in production protocol. So, would some one please post the facts that make IPv6 so bad. On 1/16/2011 2:51 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1999-09-10/ I think I missed Friday. While I agree v6 is a crap pile, it also is going to be implemented and far sooner then some people think. Not that my source is all authoritative on the subject, it was a conversation with a cellular tech support. His claim is that $employer will be moving to a v6 network asap. They already run deep NAT on everything have hundreds of complaints about broken VPNs daily (the same subject of my call). The crazy part of their network is that it was not even consistent NAting. One tower hands out 192.168.0.0/16's that then NAT to a 10.x then the public proxy, while down the road you skip the 192 and get a 10.x directly. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
On 01/16/2011 02:24 PM, Fred Goldstein wrote: If there really does turn out to be *meaningful* content that can *only* be reached via v6, then gateways will exist. One form or other of a 4-to-6-NAT. Name-based services will help; using an IP address in the application layer is a capital-M Mistake in the current stack. So NAT is the answer to everything? SIGH. I can see that attempting to discuss this further with you will be fruitless and a waste of time. No, I didn't say customers should worry about it. Ummm, from YOUR message: If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. Maybe I didn't interpret this correctly? Sounds to me that you DID say that. Since space is a non-problem, why spend so much to fix it? You are the only one with the opinion that available space is a non-problem. Use the space more efficiently. It's much cheaper and for that matter more secure. I'll not even attempt to have this NAT is secure argument with you. I know the truth and it will do little good to try to convince you. Efficiency aside (that is, after all the REAL purpose of NAT), there is no good reason to NAT. IPv6, even with all the inherent issues, WILL address the lack of space. Additionally, it is child's play to create an SPI firewall that mimics the security of NAT, even with public space. Let the market re-allocate existing v4 blocks. That has to happen anyway, *because* the transition requires dual-stack, probably for 10-20 years. (And by then I hope to have succeeded in getting an alternative available and accepted. I am working on it.) So your beef isn't Cisco, it's the fact that your preferred protocol lost? I knew that all along, but was waiting for you to say it outright. FWIW, I agree that TUBA was a MUCH better approach, but that isn't the world we live in. Also, even if the market reallocates existing space, we will not last 10+ years with the current growth rates. This is an argument that you have not won for the past 10 years, why would you expect us to bury our heads in the sand (ignore it and it will go away) with some confidence that you will win in the next 10 years? Yes, in one sense. Because anyone who wants their content to be available to the general pubilc *will* make it available in v4. But gateways will also exist, so a v4 user will be able to reach most v6-only content, if there's demand. And what about the reality that space IS limited (even if every unused IP block were returned, we'd only have a year or so at the MOST)? One of the *problems* in the current model is the inability to make networks *not* available to everyone. Think about that... host-based security isn't perfect. Power infrastructure, security, corporate data, etc. V6 doesn't really fix this. We will still need firewalls, which relay applications. NAT is your friend. NAT is not a security model. Sorry, but that's just fact. Even if you say it 10 times, it will STILL be fact. You can try 100 times, but I doubt it will change just because you say it. Good try, but not a valid argument. Proper security measures are still going to be needed (whether there is v4 or v6 with or without NAT). I understand the security implications, but NAT won't fix those under any circumstance. Huh? If everyone ignored it, then it would go the way of GOSIP. End users are tending to ignore it; it's the vendor community, and some ISPs, who are all atwitter about it. This is just ridiculous. Sure, if everyone ignored it, it WOULD go away. The problem is that the RIRs are right now handing out IP space from the v6 pool. It isn't being ignored. So, where does that leave you? Perhaps you can bury your head, but those of us in the real world should continue planning to transition our networks, since the world around us will be doing the same thing. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I'm not going to tie up this list with a long protocol war, since this isn't the forum, but I'll answer a few questions. You can see some more stuff on my web site and especially the Pouzin Society site, but there will be more coming out later. At 1/16/2011 03:36 PM, JeromieR wrote: I must have missed something along the way. I keep seeing postings here that IPv6 is worthless, yet when I read the posts on NANOG, ARIN and IETF mail lists, it is a viable and in production protocol. So, would some one please post the facts that make IPv6 so bad. The facts that I'm concerned with begin with the fact that IPv4 itself has a lot of flaws. It was a nice experimental protocol for 1978, when v4 came out, but even then it carried on mistakes that were known by 1972. Starting with the fact that it addresses interfaces, not nodes or applications, and thus an IP address is really just a layer 2 address (hence multihoming often requires a separate AS, etc.). This was pure arrogance, copying from NCP something that was a quick expedient at th time (NCP, 1969) and treating it as revealed truth, though it was known to be problematic by the. The key problem with IPv6 is that they decided explicitly to NOT fix any of these things, and to ONLY fix the assumed address-shortage problem. And then they made it incompatible, so it's a really costly fix for little gain. They've been pushing hard to sell this turkey for 17 years now and only this Y2K-redux hysteria about IPv4 homestead address spaces is causing real interest. JonA added, It is a protocol wonk holy war :-) Yes. Heck, we've been having these since the 1970s, if not longer. Ever wonder why X.25 had so many options? IPv6 is worse OSI is better Using the definition from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better Not sure where that comes from. OSI was a failed attempt at committee creation. It tried to have two incompatible factions work together, so it created its own split stack. The reference model also had a fatal flaw (layers 5 and 6; these were properly application layer functions) and while that was eventually (after anyone cared) fixed, the first (and last?) free implementation (Marsh Rose, The Open Book) got it wrong and it worked horribly. Much worse than Berkeley's free TCP/IP, which thus won. I'm not pushing OSI. For historical purposes, I note that TUBA was better, and it was based on the good part of OSI, but we're not proposing going back there. I am suggesting that RINA is a better long-term solution, and, most importantly, that it will be possible to adopt RINA easier than to transition to IPv6. We (John Day, really) designed RINA to be more compatible with IP than IPv6 is compatible with IPv4. Plus it's just a whole lot simpler, stack-wise, and does a whole lot more. Does not matter to me because I have customers that need end-to-end connectivity to China and mobile data in the US (that is going native v6 with v4 NAT) so I'm deploying IPv6. We still have to convince the cellcos that they're going the wrong way, but I suspect they'll be doing header compression, to save bits (= bandwidth, battery power). There are certainty interesting aspects to the side Fred is on, as indicated, I believe, in this book: http://amzn.to/gHQDax. I'm still reading it so no comment there. Yes, that's John Day's book, Patterns in Network Architecture: A Return to Fundamentals. It lays out the principles behind RINA, which is the newer marketing name for what was being called PNA at the time of the book. They have interesting ideas but they would be better off building a overlay network stack ala Skype (P2P network stack, not the voip program) for app developers, IMO. I can't comment in public about who's doing what, but I can say that RINA works *above* IP (like Skype), so you can indeed use IP as a link layer for RINA applications, or to use RINA's encryption as an alternative to IPSec. You can also run RINA *below* IP, as an alternative to MPLS. Or in parallel, or gatewayed. Since the same three protocols form a layer that recurses, the protocols can fit into the customer stack wherever it's most useful. BTW, RINA solves the address problem directly. Only the application is addressed, not an interface *or* node. Addresses within a layer are hidden from the outside, assigned topologically, and are just local identifiers. In IP, the addresses are a per se layer violation, since they are used both to route on and as part of the upper layer connection identifier. The simple fact is I have customers that want IPv6 and they give me money to provide it. If someone wants to give me money to tunnel their NetBUI traffic over the internet I'll do that as well. Indeed; I like to design my transport networks, both fiber and radio, as layer 2 switched (not bridged), so that they can carry IPv4, IPv6, RINA, DECnet, NetBUEI, XNS, SNA... Rather than carry on a
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
On 01/13/2011 09:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. Perhaps personal opinion, but bad advice. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. Have you even tried explaining how to configure their email client? Explaining IPv6 would be much harder. Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. Umm...IPv6 is not a Cisco fantasy. While I agree that there are some serious problems with the current implementation, I cannot say that it is a total waste. There are some security issues to be sure, but for the most part, it works and works well. -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
On 01/13/2011 05:54 PM, Greg Ihnen wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg, are you on the IPv6 mailing list? I posted a complete configuration there (very simple config) for MT with an HE tunnel. I believe that most of that post was put up on the member's wiki, though I can't be certain. It will work with any MT device (including 750). -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
On 01/13/2011 06:23 PM, Kristian Hoffmann wrote: I ran across this subtle caveat today in the MT wiki... http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Interface/Wireless Note: Currently IPv6 doesn't work over Pseudobridge This could (should?) be reworded as: Note: Currently most things (including IPv6) do not work (well) over Pseudobridge. Just a thought. :-) -- * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* * http://www.butchevans.com/* Network Engineering * * http://store.wispgear.net/* Wired or Wireless Networks * * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * ImageStream, Mikrotik and MORE! * WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
The pressure of government or Industry pushing IPv6 for the sake of the protocol has never worked. Forcing change is difficult. But what we cant ignore is 1) IPv4 available space is disapearing. 2) There are actually benefits to IPv6, where WISPs might want to start using it for their own benefit. Its not so hard to embrase change when someone sees clearly the return on their investment in change. Some facts are... 1. VIDEO can be delviered more cost effectively and efficiently over IPv6, because multicast is native and required for IPv6 operation. 2. Long path (east coast to west coast) latency can often be heavilly reduced, because of the ability to use very large packet/window sizes. This is becoming more important as the GLobal INternet expands. Of course there are many other advantages. Tom DeReggi RapidDSL Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband - Original Message - From: Scott Reed To: WISPA General List Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 7:55 PM Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6? While it is true that the HE tunnel is IPv4 on the HE-facing side, the MT is doing true IPv6 on the internal side. I have had my Windows XP laptop, a couple of MT routers and a Linux server all connected and they do IPv6 just fine and use the HE tunnel as well. Keep in mind, v6 is not new, it is well over 10 years old. Lots of things work better than you may think using v6. On 1/13/2011 7:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: When did they add on IPv6? I see on some of my 4.x routers I see VERY simple services - IP discovery, addresses and routes. I think the only real way to deploy ipv6 with MT is on rc7. You're the only brave soul I know of. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: My point is that you're a step away from accomplishing what you're asking others for at no consequence. I apologize if I offended you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 -- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I pushed UBNT on this directly - as they have not given a direct date. http://ubnt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26668 ARIN had been giving IPV6 out for FREE - so it is not just a dream With vendors (like Time Warner) trying to charge $1 per IP (that is where they start the negotiating) - that new market will still be an expensive one for IPv6 Yes there is a waste of IPv4 ... but IPv6 is more than a pipe dream... It is a reality and one that we need to embrace sooner than later HE.Net has an excellent tutorial online - gives you a Free certification (yay - something to put on the fridge next to your kids school stuff ) and They provide a FREE tunnel for you to push IPV6 to IPV4 traffic - even over BGP My vote is - we embrace it - as it will only help us. On Jan 13, 2011, at 3:25 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: Have you actually tested that? I ask because I expect it to work, too, but haven't actually done it myself. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.net wrote: Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ _ Glenn Kelley | Principal | HostMedic |www.HostMedic.com Email: gl...@hostmedic.com Pplease don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
[WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
At 1/13/2011 10:00 AM, GregI wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no compatibility, the transition plan requires dual stack. So everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Direct answer to the queston is, you will not know when it is turned on. IPv6 is a new protocol that uses different header information in the packets. If you don't turn on support on your devices, they will ignore the packets. I disagree with Fred's opinions. Not everything is going to run v4 until v6 is prevalent. There will soon be content that is only available via v6. We are going to need to be able to get our customers access to v6 sometime in the not too distant future. Since IPv6 has been standardized by the IETF, I don't think it is any longer a Cisco dream. It is going to become a prevalent part of the internet. On 1/13/2011 10:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/13/2011 10:00 AM, GregI wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no compatibility, the transition plan requires dual stack. So everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. I am very concerned being that only 2 percent of the IPv4 pool remains. http://ipv6.he.net/statistics/ In a few months we may not be able to get more IPv4 space. What then? NAT everyone? Ugh, with thousands of custommers thats an ugly proposition. How do you track down abuse, subpoena issues and so many other things... If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no compatibility, the transition plan requires dual stack. So everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I agree. v4 space IS running out. Cellular co's are looking to move to a v6 space and drop the nat that most of them run. I already run dual stack on my MT's. I am waiting for Ubnt to add v6 so I can hand directly to end users as well. There are like 7 /8's left and IIRC China gobbled 2 in 2010 and is expected to take another in February or March. AfriNIC is expected to take one as well, that will then trigger the last 5 to be handed out. Then we are looking at the end of v4 space. ARIN will have its total allocations and once they hand out what they have, there is no more to be hand unless someone gives up space. Can I have your v4 IPs? v6 will be a must by the end of this year, middle of 2012 at the latest. Hmm, maybe them Myans really did know something, its 1999 all over again!! On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Scott Reed sr...@nwwnet.net wrote: Direct answer to the queston is, you will not know when it is turned on. IPv6 is a new protocol that uses different header information in the packets. If you don't turn on support on your devices, they will ignore the packets. I disagree with Fred's opinions. Not everything is going to run v4 until v6 is prevalent. There will soon be content that is only available via v6. We are going to need to be able to get our customers access to v6 sometime in the not too distant future. Since IPv6 has been standardized by the IETF, I don't think it is any longer a Cisco dream. It is going to become a prevalent part of the internet. On 1/13/2011 10:19 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/13/2011 10:00 AM, GregI wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no compatibility, the transition plan requires dual stack. So everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I'm currently using a RB-750 with a IPv6 tunnel/delegation from he.net at home. Works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Oh good point, me too. Keep in mind this is a 6 over 4 tunnel. The 750 talks ipv4 to he.net Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Jon Auer j...@tapodi.net wrote: I'm currently using a RB-750 with a IPv6 tunnel/delegation from he.net at home. Works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Does that tunnel add overhead (cut down throughput)? I'm guessing it would have to. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Jon Auer wrote: I'm currently using a RB-750 with a IPv6 tunnel/delegation from he.net at home. Works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
It would have to, but you don't do speed tests through it - it's a free tunnel for technical testing and such. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Does that tunnel add overhead (cut down throughput)? I'm guessing it would have to. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Jon Auer wrote: I'm currently using a RB-750 with a IPv6 tunnel/delegation from he.net at home. Works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
At 1/13/2011 11:59 AM, you wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. I am very concerned being that only 2 percent of the IPv4 pool remains. http://ipv6.he.net/statistics/ In a few months we may not be able to get more IPv4 space. What then? NAT everyone? Ugh, with thousands of custommers thats an ugly proposition. How do you track down abuse, subpoena issues and so many other things... That's Y2K redux, a fear campaign. HE in particular is trying to use it as a differentiator. What is running out is virgin, never-before-assigned IPv4 space. It is like the land offices in the homestead era. Eventually they ran out of land. Yet farming continued. IPv4 addresses were initially handed out very inefficiently. There are many owners of blocks that are larger than needed. If you are qualified for a block, you are qualified to buy a block from someone who already has one. A market will happen, and I don't think it will be very expensive. Nor am I too concerned about NAT. NAT only breaks broken applications. Public servers need public addresses, but the mass market user doesn't. (Inability to handle subpoenas may be seen as an advantage...) Check out the Pouzin Society for an alternative. I've got some more on this on my web site. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via IPv6, they can tunnel out. But since there is no compatibility, the transition plan requires dual stack. So everything runs v4 until everybody is on v6. But since there's always more on v4 (everybody) than on v6 (those who have added the dual stack), there's no incentive for users to move to v4. The only benefit is to some ISPs, not to users. So users have little reason to move. (Sometimes users are smarter than some ISPs.) Plus v6 is an abomination, a misdesign of immense proportions, so you shouldn't buy into Cisco's fantasies. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Well, yes, due to the tunnel encapsulation you have less MTU headroom so you move less data in each packet so you need more packets to transfer the same amount of data (assuming the data is larger than the packet size). It has not been noticeable. I just hit up the Google and Facebook IPv6 sites from time to time. No online backup or SCP transfers. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:16 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Does that tunnel add overhead (cut down throughput)? I'm guessing it would have to. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 12:43 PM, Jon Auer wrote: I'm currently using a RB-750 with a IPv6 tunnel/delegation from he.net at home. Works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Don't feed the trolls. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL038AAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt4vsQALY+GnQXl8lfEUh/OBVqOdpi ys+fFVNeCotsgrS18XfmojJiQGoSsRJ9NEvlAqZpU074SeaY7G3pcG8ltYHz7pV3 Q/g28bgAOqxrAU9RgvRaIFQu1gYnatzwtJcMXAE4aqUi2J6bPnq7mhV9fZtm2H3v loUEi54hQknRC4YEKGJSUNtniF1Ry1AKqbWr/FL6k8TgvNLZq3a+PEKJCnquUgW5 1Wag/Uh4+pKyzeoFPrYaRhsCCME8YDM7ca+ypL7kaYcKr/essmCaElONn8l3kZ23 g7bKDq4enfpnDHywImiVajn4ZR6lk09TKUjfjy9i+h+qXCC4VD5jU4J4zVe2pXPM jloNlTn37g3un0+BdVQ4AwCAoRiWRor+64bHhNVfJUL/7OG3CTUZuLKlVGbYMh8A SHDNQ0Izbl6Ezky3o91sMXCy/yVyTniOZFQY27Nr4XGn068Sh7yh8qE57VcSH7HC V19W3Ov1qaSqoBYy5NAIia/leyEHbG9zGhI/r1ETYJsJEgO+9BMZB6dA+AV1CqM5 fFvwpwTk+xuGQttSJ+HpVgwDDFE5In/NF/3AF8V8mGWAfF6z6mjJNHvtute0fnCR v7iXSvMS+qBS6xbXMZnuDDH//doB+IlKNKwdug9Nv0dPHvuQq1HotrzDqIw9t7QF qhtMvXcinPOHgHeiR3g2 =aZoA -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
At 1/13/2011 02:09 PM, Charles Wyble wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Don't feed the trolls. Who are you calling a troll, oh young whippersnapper? -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Have you actually tested that? I ask because I expect it to work, too, but haven't actually done it myself. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.netwrote: Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Have you actually tested that? I ask because I expect it to work, too, but haven't actually done it myself. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.net wrote: Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Awesome, appreciate the confirmation. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.netwrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Have you actually tested that? I ask because I expect it to work, too, but haven't actually done it myself. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.net wrote: Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA+Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo+7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O+bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ+YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ+SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Yeah, I'm running RC7, but in an IPv4 network. I'd like to hear how it's doing with IPv6. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Sounds like you're already beta testing with RC7. Can't you just tack on an he.net tunnel? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I'm running RC7, but in an IPv4 network. I'd like to hear how it's doing with IPv6. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:58 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Yeah, I could but this is a production network, and we're in the Amazon, and the network is our only comms, and it's a satellite 512k/128k connection, and we try to do Skype, and with the lack of bandwidth and high latency and jitter it's already iffy. I'm afraid to add the HE tunnel into the mix (though I have already set up an account some time ago). Maybe I'll try it when nobody is looking. And if things go wrong I can always blame the ISP. : - ) Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:03 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: Sounds like you're already beta testing with RC7. Can't you just tack on an he.net tunnel? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
IPv6 on top of v4 won't change the way v4 runs. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I could but this is a production network, and we're in the Amazon, and the network is our only comms, and it's a satellite 512k/128k connection, and we try to do Skype, and with the lack of bandwidth and high latency and jitter it's already iffy. I'm afraid to add the HE tunnel into the mix (though I have already set up an account some time ago). Maybe I'll try it when nobody is looking. And if things go wrong I can always blame the ISP. : - ) Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:03 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: Sounds like you're already beta testing with RC7. Can't you just tack on an he.net tunnel? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
But even 3.30 supports enough v6 for it to work. I have a working tunnel to HE via 5.0rc5 that is working well. I suppose it is time to upgrade that one. On 1/13/2011 6:28 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Just testing you. No, really. Thanks Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: IPv6 on top of v4 won't change the way v4 runs. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
To route? Or are you referring to bridge? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Scott Reed sr...@nwwnet.net wrote: But even 3.30 supports enough v6 for it to work. I have a working tunnel to HE via 5.0rc5 that is working well. I suppose it is time to upgrade that one. On 1/13/2011 6:28 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today!http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Depending on how full his pipe already is, I'd be concerned with overhead as a percentage of a full pipe. - Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com On 1/13/2011 5:39 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: IPv6 on top of v4 won't change the way v4 runs. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Yeah, I could but this is a production network, and we're in the Amazon, and the network is our only comms, and it's a satellite 512k/128k connection, and we try to do Skype, and with the lack of bandwidth and high latency and jitter it's already iffy. I'm afraid to add the HE tunnel into the mix (though I have already set up an account some time ago). Maybe I'll try it when nobody is looking. And if things go wrong I can always blame the ISP. : - ) Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:03 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: Sounds like you're already beta testing with RC7. Can't you just tack on an he.net http://he.net/ tunnel? WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
My point is that you're a step away from accomplishing what you're asking others for at no consequence. I apologize if I offended you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:44 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Just testing you. No, really. Thanks Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:09 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: IPv6 on top of v4 won't change the way v4 runs. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: My point is that you're a step away from accomplishing what you're asking others for at no consequence. I apologize if I offended you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
When did they add on IPv6? I see on some of my 4.x routers I see VERY simple services - IP discovery, addresses and routes. I think the only real way to deploy ipv6 with MT is on rc7. You're the only brave soul I know of. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: My point is that you're a step away from accomplishing what you're asking others for at no consequence. I apologize if I offended you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Yea, all the core routers are MT 3.30 and up. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
I ran across this subtle caveat today in the MT wiki... http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:Interface/Wireless Note: Currently IPv6 doesn't work over Pseudobridge -Kristian On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 16:49 -0500, Josh Luthman wrote: Awesome, appreciate the confirmation. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.net wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Josh Luthman j...@imaginenetworksllc.com wrote: Have you actually tested that? I ask because I expect it to work, too, but haven't actually done it myself. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Jeromie Reeves jree...@18-30chat.net wrote: Sure Ubnt in bridge mode works fine. We still need native v6 support. On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Charles N Wyble char...@knownelement.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 01/13/2011 07:00 AM, Greg Ihnen wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Interesting question. I'm hoping to provide ipv6 on my network very soon. Currently only handing out ipv4. I have my ubnt ns2 working as a hotspot on my roof. It bridges to my wired network (cisco l2 switch and pfsense box). On it's own VLAN of course. So do I care about ubnt supporting ipv6? Will it not work in bridge mode? I need to turn on v6 on the pfsense side, via an he.net tunnel with prefix delegation and find out. Anyone done this? On whatever l3 termination of choice (pfsense/cisco/linux/mikrotik). Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Greg - -- Charles N Wyble (char...@knownelement.com) Systems craftsman for the stars http://www.knownelement.com Mobile: 626 539 4344 Office: 310 929 8793 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNL1LyAAoJEMvvG/TyLEAt2QkP/31PZuaL5xY3f3QDt0/2eSkg 03pKgN5OJM9THHIjchyFQJuAwzoxc6g8CsqbfNQEWNaOqpgwSWPLJXv9YaJZ8KKK xxYeX70fsLTU1jYKVjbHE+vA +Hwq2VjgecDLrzI1m7/tIbUdHWlWscKYr65l6IJR Bd8pVRwokbvdr7XvOIeBL77cAC5DPzpFayP/YWZBGpOM2JT4BU5R3cru4KZSIswN IjGY64Ofc7YW5PIvQasDvSLTGikKj5hhCoKhALrHoazGy2oevBWZ1E86LvxbTJ04 JPIof8WihpKA/VJQAfo +7UirXAQnpGfb4O6FAiPrhlfR61Z5hPGxMbpVPTZhS+Vx PXR1+X+m2UJicdAs+O +bhN3BBRgaXb4Fj9fituyQW/2UcGvyD/iiAiWg9u2nDdfY muQ8lv/nx0wC8e5VscZ9cBMKkh7l2Z6QkKhfwrcyfwLFVG6KGTvpoNDYAU1UGTGU u1Zb7Gbht3awn18yu4693HWu5PCYEKJ4Sl29ew1avRpf80pFDzXyNnJ +YSjuo159 ZbUYTbKlFYOrdxK2k2lxe4sCOSRq0/B0n3y3Z4ummkyKlTJnnVQpz0rozus3fteT t+q2tJxkIJ61aAPUrcq3kl6UAc+KZ +SjHKeZwtbFt3J1gbFoHG3izdDOUrZaF4zW TLZ9++N8yZOW8Pko9Xb3 =i8uH -END PGP SIGNATURE- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
Route. I don't use bridges for much of anything. On 1/13/2011 6:44 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: To route? Or are you referring to bridge? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Scott Reed sr...@nwwnet.net mailto:sr...@nwwnet.net wrote: But even 3.30 supports enough v6 for it to work. I have a working tunnel to HE via 5.0rc5 that is working well. I suppose it is time to upgrade that one. On 1/13/2011 6:28 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: The RC for v5 just added a lot of IPv6 stuff. No more then a few weeks old. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: Any Mikrotik routers in the mix? Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 5:18 PM, Jeromie Reeves wrote: Yes I have. All my AP's are AP-WDS and all clients are WDS with a router behind it. v6 works fine. WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List:wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives:http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net http://www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6?
While it is true that the HE tunnel is IPv4 on the HE-facing side, the MT is doing true IPv6 on the internal side. I have had my Windows XP laptop, a couple of MT routers and a Linux server all connected and they do IPv6 just fine and use the HE tunnel as well. Keep in mind, v6 is not new, it is well over 10 years old. Lots of things work better than you may think using v6. On 1/13/2011 7:00 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: When did they add on IPv6? I see on some of my 4.x routers I see VERY simple services - IP discovery, addresses and routes. I think the only real way to deploy ipv6 with MT is on rc7. You're the only brave soul I know of. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 6:54 PM, Greg Ihnen os10ru...@gmail.com mailto:os10ru...@gmail.com wrote: No, I'm not offended at all. I appreciate your comments and the privilege of being in the forum. When I read what you wrote about how the HE tunnel is IPv4 as far as the MT router is concerned (that had escaped me). But I still would be interested to know if others are doing true IPv6 through the MT RB750/RB450. Greg On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Josh Luthman wrote: My point is that you're a step away from accomplishing what you're asking others for at no consequence. I apologize if I offended you. Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
