[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  LEE Tet Yoon <leety at ihug dot co dot nz>
 To:  monowall <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Beta 1.3b13 released
 Date:  Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:48:05 +1200
At 04:55 a.m. 15/07/2008, you wrote:
>On 14.07.2008, at 18:11, Marc-Andre Alpers wrote:
>>Ok, that is a sad news. Perhaps it is possible to add Aiccu from
>>Sixxs.net in M0n0wall?
>I might consider it if there's sufficient demand...
>>In german we have only dynamic public v4
>>adresses from most providers, so we can't use ordinary tunnels.
>>Because the public ip adress change every 24 hours.
>What's wrong with 6to4?

Forgive me if any of this is wrong, I'm still new to IPv6...

With 6to4 your IPv6 IP remains dynamic. With a tunnel broker you can have a static IPv6 IP even if
your IPv4 IP is dynamic. This gives more options, e.g. you can give all your computers static
publicly routable IPv6 IPs. Also SixXs for example has a number of PoPs and there are a number of
independent tunnel brokers aside. Perhaps you have better routing to one of them then you have with
your local 6to4 relay router.

So all in all, 6to4 is the best solution if you want things to be simple but a tunnel broker gives
more versatility for the advanced user. And if you have a dynamic IP, you need support for some sort
of tunnel control protocol (e.g. SixX heartbeat, Hexago's Gateway6) to use a tunnel.

Of course perhaps it's too much work for something which is going to eventually disappear. If ISPs
would start offering IPv6 natively or at least set up their own 6to4 relay routers thing won't be
quite as bad. Sadly many ISPs still seem a long way away from that.