From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: mail@danrl.com Received: from mx.sealand.io (mx.sealand.io [193.160.39.68]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id c79d6b1a for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:49:29 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\)) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dan_L=C3=BCdtke?= In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:54:49 +0100 Message-Id: <7FCCB728-BB7E-4A4F-ABAC-7D16FA6A1382@danrl.com> References: <44DAF4D4-00A8-4903-8003-EB0215635B61@danrl.com> To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Cc: WireGuard mailing list Subject: Re: [WireGuard] Demo Server: Dual stack? List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Thanks Jason! No hurry, though. Is the script open source as well? Maybe I can tinker with it, so you = don't waste your precious development time on supporting infrastructure. > On 16 Nov 2016, at 15:49, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >=20 > Hey Dan, >=20 > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Dan L=C3=BCdtke = wrote: >> Hi Jason, >>=20 >>> I guess I could provide IPv6 connectivity, but.... why? It's a demo. >>=20 >> Because it is a demo of a brand new protocol, showing how it can be = used with legacy versions payload and transport protocol. I find that = odd, but as I understand we have contradicting point of views on IP = protocols. >=20 > I see what you mean. That's a fair point. We might as well give people > an opportunity for trying things out, indeed. >=20 > Currently the scripts on the server don't support that, so I'll have > to write a small bit of code, but it shouldn't be too bad. I'll circle > back in a few weeks. >=20 > Jason