From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Mar 12 00:38:38 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702CE16A4CE
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:38:38 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mx2.netflix.com (mail2.netflix.com [216.35.131.152])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 553F443D48
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>;
	Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:38:38 +0000 (GMT)	(envelope-from nsayer@kfu.com)
Received: from [172.22.8.180] ([172.22.8.180])
	by mx2.netflix.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j2C0cbKD001481
	for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:38:37 -0800
Message-ID: <42323A0D.8060501@kfu.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:38:37 -0800
From: Nick Sayer <nsayer@kfu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041111
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
References: <4232198F.5030705@kfu.com> <yge3bv16a9e.wl%ume@mahoroba.org>
In-Reply-To: <yge3bv16a9e.wl%ume@mahoroba.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: 6to4, stf and shoebox NAT routers
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
	<freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
	<mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 00:38:38 -0000

Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:

>I posted my proposed patch to current@ for review in the past.  But,
>no one responded.  Could you test this?  This is for 6-CURRENT at Feb 1.
>If it doesn't apply cleanly, please let me know.
>  
>
Domo arigato gozaimasu!

It had fuzz when applied to 5.3-RELEASE, but it did apply.

I am at work, behind the wrong firewall, so I cannot test this 
completely, but with your patch applied and turned on, I can see that 
configuring my machine (which lives in 172.16 space) with a "foreign" 
6to4 prefix on stf0 results in ping6 packets being transmitted correctly 
(tcpdump shows a correct ipv6 packet and shows an ipv4 header with the 
packet being from my 172.16 machine and going to the correct 
destination). I have high hopes that the return side will work when it's 
deployed for real.