Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2005 00:53:57 +0100 From: Lukasz Stelmach <Lukasz.Stelmach@telmark.waw.pl> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: if_stf and rfc1918 Message-ID: <20050130235357.GA72888@tygrys.k.telmark.waw.pl>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--envbJBWh7q8WU6mo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings All. Once I've discussed this matter with Hajimu UMEMOTO and he posted a patch that made it possible to run 6to4 router behind a nat (FreeBSD 4.x). Soon I will probably be upgrading my old system to 5.x release so I checked if newer stf code allows such operation and to my disapointment I've found out that it doesn't (or at least it seems so). The comment in the code says that it is a requirement of RFC3056. I've check it and in fact it says that RFC1918 addresses MUST NOT be used as NLAs in 6to4 addresses. But IMHO it does not mean that I can't run my 6to4 router behind a NAT at all. In such a situation the IPv6 address contains valid public IPv4 address and the private one in the IPv4 header is substitutet by NAT. So after the packets leave my site they are completly valid 6to4 packets. Also when 6to4 packets come to me they are handeled properly. My question now is why FreeBSD is so restrictive about it. Best regards, =A3ukasz Stelmach. PS. Please cc: the answer, thank you. --=20 |/ |_, _ .- --, Ju=BF z ka=BFdej strony pe=B3zn=B1, potworne =BF= =B1dze |__ |_|. | \ |_|. ._' /_. B=EAd=EA uprawia=B3 nierz=B1d, za pieni= =B1dze --envbJBWh7q8WU6mo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFB/XOVNdzY8sm9K9wRAo8dAKCBlISxioK4RPJKupFuR30jInyIfQCdGpQw c5wUTATZRrdD8lXPNjseT20= =N6fR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --envbJBWh7q8WU6mo--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050130235357.GA72888>