nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns
From: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen () mompl net>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:07:53 -0800
Mark Andrews wrote:
Firstly I would use a tunnel broker instead of 6to4. Easier to debug failures.
Thanks all for the helpful response. Using the same names for IPv6 and IPv4 doesn't appear to be much of a problem, especially considering this is a trial which concerns office/home ISP connectivity, for now.
Which IPv6 tunnel broker is preferable, or does it really matter? Thanks, Jeroen -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
Current thread:
- IPv6 6to4 and dns Jeroen van Aart (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Mark Andrews (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Jeroen van Aart (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Franck Martin (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Kevin Oberman (Nov 22)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Franck Martin (Nov 22)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Jeroen van Aart (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Mark Andrews (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns Mark Andrews (Nov 18)