From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jun 25 02:47:07 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 810FC15B8B58; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 02:47:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from echo.brtsvcs.net (echo.brtsvcs.net [IPv6:2607:f740:c::4ae]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D0C76CCDC; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 02:47:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com) Received: from chombo.houseloki.net (chombo [IPv6:2601:1c2:1402:1770:ae1f:6bff:fe6b:9e1c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "chombo.houseloki.net", Issuer "brtsvcs.net CA" (verified OK)) by echo.brtsvcs.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91E9E38D0F; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2601:1c2:1402:1770:3c0b:f5d0:647:2a5] (unknown [IPv6:2601:1c2:1402:1770:3c0b:f5d0:647:2a5]) by chombo.houseloki.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12FA42F88; Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:47:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: IPv6-only network--is NAT64+DNS64 really this easy now? To: Ultima Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Mailing List References: <5e24739b-bbd0-d94a-5b0e-53fdeba81245@bluerosetech.com> From: Mel Pilgrim Message-ID: <19784363-6543-ccc1-b13f-5f1a67dc10d1@bluerosetech.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 19:47:01 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9D0C76CCDC X-Spamd-Bar: ----- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com designates 2607:f740:c::4ae as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=list_freebsd@bluerosetech.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.63 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[bluerosetech.com]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: echo.brtsvcs.net]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.982,0]; IP_SCORE(-3.34)[ip: (-8.47), ipnet: 2607:f740:c::/48(-4.31), asn: 36236(-3.88), country: US(-0.06)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:2607:f740:c::/48, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 02:47:07 -0000 On 2019-06-24 19:33, Ultima wrote: > Hello Mel, > > While it may be possible to have an IPv6 only environment, I don't > think it is really viable. There are simply too many things that don't run > on or have very limited support for IPv6 that it makes it very hard > to drop IPv4 altogether and until something comes along forcing the > move it likely won't happen for at least another decade at the minimum. Yes, that is why I wrote "Waving a hand at bug-hunting and lamentations over the inertia of embedded systems designers". This a lab experiment specifically to iron out the very wrinkles you just stated. > On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 6:50 PM Mel Pilgrim > wrote: > >> I'm looking to set up a pure-IPv6 environment to test the viability of >> it. I tried this a few years ago and fell flat on my face due to the >> lack of NAT64 and DNS64 support. >> >> Reading through docs now, it looks like unbound has a DNS64 module, and >> NAT64 is baked into ipfw. Waving a hand at bug-hunting and lamentations >> over the inertia of embedded systems designers, has it really become >> this easy to turn up an IPv6-only site?