From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <10b109140808291131s28ab3c83pe150b0d8f963b01c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 20:31:55 +0200 From: "Antonin Vecera" To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <10b109140808280915h3216372bh219ec5d56b54e1f8@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [9fans] What is the status of IPv6? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0aaf3016-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 5:43 PM, wrote: > IPv6 support is a little rusty, but was working. I need to > reestablish an IPv6 test environment here to continually exercise the > code and figure out some remaining thorny issues. The last time I > tried it, I could connect to remote systems via IPv6 using 6in4(8) but > not local systems, and it appeared that Neighbour Discovery (the v6 > equivalent of ARP, which uses multicast) was broken. > > Some of the thorny issues are: > > - how best to operate in a mixed v4 and v6 world, where some hosts are > v4-only, some are v6-only and some (eventually a lot) are capable of > using both v4 and v6, preferably global (non-NAT, non-private, > non-local) addresses. Is the ipv6 attribute of ndb actually useful, > or should we just use the ip attribute for v4 and v6? > > - how to configure diskless v6-only (or almost only) machines at boot > time? dhcp v6 seems pointless yet complex, v6 autoconfiguration might > suffice with changes to implement dynamic dns, or dhcp v4 might be > able to carry the necessary data. > > - how best to evade v4-only IP infrastructure (routers, firewalls, > proxies, etc.). > > I'd be interested in hearing from anyone currently using v6 with Plan > 9, particularly in Japan. Thanks for your reply. Now I am not able to send or receive any byte via v6 ip. It matches to your message. I have FreeBSD server with tunnel to Hexago. If will be there some progress in ipv6 stack I will test it. Antonin