[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  Steve Bertrand <iaccounts at ibctech dot ca>
 To:  Adam Armstrong <lists at memetic dot org>
 Cc:  Tet Yoon Lee <leety at ihug dot co dot nz>, m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] IPv6
 Date:  Thu, 27 Mar 2008 13:49:29 -0400
> Well, there are some fundamental differences between the design of 
> m0n0wall and the way IPv6 is designed to work. Firstly IPv6 doesn't (or 
> shouldn't) have NAT support, whereas NAT is probably what most m0n0walls 
> do.

I don't agree with this. I know of not one network that is strictly IPv6 
(yet), so the ability to enable IPv6 and keep all functionality of the 
original design will be important.

It is most likely that NAT will be part of IPv6 life for some time 
unfortunately (for example: NAT64).

Although I don't have any m0n0walls in use anymore, I still follow this 
thread, and the software.

The core IPv6 functionality that would be nice to have, especially for 
smaller, non-natively connected IPv6 shops will be:

- 6to4 relay
- IPv6IP tunnels
- IPv6 routing between LAN and WAN, while still providing LAN to WAN NAT 
for IPv4 transparently and independently of one another

 >> of course with support for IPv6 in the firewall,
 >> with DHCP, in the traffic shaper etc...?

I can not help with the GUI programming, however, I would be willing to 
help with the implementation details that are particular to FreeBSD 
regarding IPv6, and can provide tunnels and IPv6 addresses for testing 
different configurations and routing scenarios.