From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Dec 7 22:19:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id WAA17425 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 22:19:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp05.wxs.nl (smtp05.wxs.nl [195.121.6.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id WAA17412 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 1998 22:18:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asmodai@wxs.nl) Received: from chronias.ninth-circle.org ([195.121.56.138]) by smtp05.wxs.nl (Netscape Messaging Server 3.6) with ESMTP id AAA20FC; Tue, 8 Dec 1998 07:18:52 +0100 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <19981207193525.A18185@gvr.org> Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 07:24:29 +0100 (CET) Organization: Ninth Circle Enterprises From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai To: Guido van Rooij Subject: Re: Can we just come to a decision on IPv6 and IPSec? Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, Eivind Eklund , Andreas Klemm , "Jordan K. Hubbard" , Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 07-Dec-98 Guido van Rooij wrote: > On Fri, Dec 04, 1998 at 11:10:51AM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Itoh wrote: >> >> One thing we don't implement intentionally is automatic tunnelling >> (packets to ::10.1.1.1 automatically tunnelled over IPv6-over-IPv4 >> tunnel to 10.1.1.1). > > Hmm..what does happen when I have a IPV6/V4 host that has an IPV6 > native address (so no V4 compatible address) that wants to communicate > to an IPv4 host? Do I need to set up IPV4 specific routes to > a dual stack machine that does the tunneling for me? If I remember correctly, at the moment we are all tunneling over IPv4 to 6-Bone using the IPv4 addresses which get stripped as soon as the packets reach their tunnel gateway. So in general you only provide the default route for IPv6 to the tunnel gateway using the -tunnel option in route (at least that's how I did it using BSDi). It's an obvious choice to make the default gateway from yer internal LAN to the Internet the dual stack machine/tunneling gateway. The rest of the hosts simply use the tunneling gateway by it's native IPv4 address. Note that when approximately 50% uses IPv6 encapsulation in IPv4 packets we are going to switch it all around ;) Unfortunately, man ifconfig route | grep tunnel yields nothing, we do have a tunnel option somewhere right? --- Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven Pax vobiscum... asmodai(at)wxs.nl Network/Security Specialist BSD & picoBSD: The Power to Serve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message