nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns
From: Mark Andrews <marka () isc org>
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 10:33:35 +1100
In message <4CE6D919.2000604 () mompl net>, Jeroen van Aart writes:
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?
I've been using HE for 7 years now and have always got a fast response when I've had problems with the link.
Thanks, Jeroen -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka () isc org
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)