From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jun 25 08:28:49 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 BDD8715C47C8 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:28:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@927589452.de) Received: from alioth.uberspace.de (alioth.uberspace.de [185.26.156.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B695778EC for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 08:28:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mailinglists@927589452.de) Received: (qmail 12942 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2019 08:28:46 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO localhost) (127.0.0.1) by alioth.uberspace.de with SMTP; 25 Jun 2019 08:28:46 -0000 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:27:15 +0200 From: mailinglists-freebsd-questions@927589452.de To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: mailinglists-freebsd-questions@927589452.de Subject: Re: IPv6-only network--is NAT64+DNS64 really this easy now? Message-ID: <20190625082715.lt27gdyimo3etpjz@deathbolt.927589452.space> References: <5e24739b-bbd0-d94a-5b0e-53fdeba81245@bluerosetech.com> <19784363-6543-ccc1-b13f-5f1a67dc10d1@bluerosetech.com> <20190625071943.vwswhj2lh6ctj4vy@deathbolt.927589452.space> <20190625083824.2c259fbd7ef91efcc3857e77@sohara.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190625083824.2c259fbd7ef91efcc3857e77@sohara.org> X-Info: Keep It Simple, Stupid. X-Operating-System: FreeBSD, kernel 12.0-RELEASE X-Message-Flag: WARNING!! Microsoft sucks User-Agent: Every email client sucks, this one just sucks less. X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 8B695778EC X-Spamd-Bar: ++++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [4.88 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; XM_UA_NO_VERSION(0.01)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.61)[ip: (-2.39), ipnet: 185.26.156.0/22(-0.37), asn: 58010(-0.29), country: DE(-0.01)]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[927589452.de]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.36)[0.355,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RBL_VIRUSFREE_BOTNET(2.00)[45.156.26.185.bip.virusfree.cz : 127.0.0.2]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: alioth.uberspace.de]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_NO_DN(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.04)[-0.044,0]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.98)[0.978,0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[mailinglists-freebsd-questions@927589452.de,mailinglists@927589452.de]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:58010, ipnet:185.26.156.0/22, country:DE]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[mailinglists-freebsd-questions@927589452.de, mailinglists@927589452.de] 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 08:28:49 -0000 On 19-06-25 08:38:24, Steve O'Hara-Smith wrote: > On Tue, 25 Jun 2019 09:19:43 +0200 > mailinglists-freebsd-questions@927589452.de wrote: > > > The hardest thing is getting a real IPv&/ bigger than a /64 as this is > > required by most systems. > > > For lab work a /48 over a HE tunnel should do fine, only the router > knows it's a tunnel :) TBH: I just went live with it in my (home) network and gladly my provider announced a /48 per user