[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  mattmcadoo at mattmcadoo dot com
 To:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] Static IPv6 and routing
 Date:  Fri, 26 Feb 2010 09:20:52 -0800
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 15:55 -0800, mattmcadoo at mattmcadoo dot com wrote:
>> I have a /64 block of IPv6 addresses from my ISP and am having a hell of
>> a
>> time to get it working.  For the sake of example, my block is
>> 2001:aaaa:bbbb:cccc::/64 and the gateway is 2001:aaaa:bbbb:cccc::1 (all
>> the info that was given by my ISP)
> Unless I'm terribly confused (and I could be, I'm a v6 beginner, though
> I do have my network up and v6 connected), you can't actually subnet
> a /64.  The first 64 bits are a network prefix, and the last 64 bits are
> the host portion, typically populated using the MAC of the interface.
> If you want subnets, you need a /64 for the firewall, and then a routed
> subnet (/48 is 'standard', but some places allocate /56's or even /60's)
> for the LAN.
> Brett.

I'm not trying to subnet anything, I just want the m0n0wall box to pass
the traffic through.


  ISP GW     WAN m0n0wall LAN     LAN net
 _______     ______________     _______
 |     |    |              |    |      |
 | ::1 |<-->| ::2 m0n0 ::3 |<-->| LAN  |
 |_____|    |______________|    |__::X_|

That's all I'm trying to do.  IIRC, I've done something similar years ago
using a Freenet6 tunnel on a Gentoo Linux router.

Here's exact info I got from my ISP:

Assigned LAN Netblock: 2001:4870:6003:0002::/64
Default Gateway for LAN Netblock: 2001:4870:6003:0002::1

Is the above possible with m0n0wall?  I don't think I'm completely off
base in thinking this is a perfectly acceptable setup, but if not I would
really appreciate letting me know where I'm wrong.

This forum post seems to indicate it is possible: