SixXS::Sunset 2017-06-06

inet6 connectivity for NATed LAN
[nl] Shadow Hawkins on Friday, 31 October 2003 16:54:38
hi there, I'm a newby when it comes to ipv6. So far I tried freenet6, 6to4 with a public router (germany) and finally a sixx tunnel. What I really want is the same as for ipv4: 1 inet ip, a router with 2 nics and NAT and some LAN hosts with non inet ip's. Is this possible at all or do I need a inet6 routable subnet? Here's my setup: RedHat 6.2, kernel 2.2.24, radvd (RH 6.2 version), and cable internet (UPC/chello). The router works, can ping6/tracroute6 hosts and ip's. When radvd is running my RedHat 9 workstation gets the correct ipv6 ip and default route, well correct, it's called default so just to be sure I added 2000::/3 via router_eth0_ipv6ip. I can then ping the eth0 interface of my router and when I tell the host it needs to route ff80 through the router and not direct I can ping all ff80 interfaces on my router (eth1 and also the sixx tunnel 'device'), so ipv6 forwarding must be working. But I can't ping any ipv6 host, not even my sixx ipv6 ip, wich corresponds to tun6to4 and not the internet. My second host, RedHat 7.1, does weird things when radvd is running. This host and my workstation too can't run anything anymore as soon as I do a network restart but still respond to input. My guess is nfs is messing things up and it's not directly ipv6 related, but perhaps this sounds familiar to some known ipv6 problem? Allright in case I'm not doing the impossible: what would be a good choise for a non inet ipv6 subnet? And what additional software would I need for ipv6 NAT? tia, Jeroen Beerstra
inet6 connectivity for NATed LAN
[ch] Jeroen Massar SixXS Staff on Saturday, 01 November 2003 12:30:10
fe80::/10 is linklocal, which cannot be used for routing as it is local on the link (that particular cable/switch etc) See the bottom of the presentations setting for Steve Deering's presentation which will explain quite a lot of IPv6. You don't want IPv6 NAT, which fortunatly don't exist (yet), you need a subnet which you quite probably want to firewall. There really is no reason for IPv6 NAT btw. 2.2.21 and up should be able to use 'default' (0::/0) as a default route, 2000::/3 was the fix with lower or non-usagi kernels.

Please note Posting is only allowed when you are logged in.

Static Sunset Edition of SixXS
©2001-2017 SixXS - IPv6 Deployment & Tunnel Broker