Re: IPv6, was IPv10

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Thu, 29 Dec 2016, John R Levine wrote:

It sounds like you want a homenet router.

Possibly, but I'd rather have a v6 network where the addresses hold still.

Can this not be accomplished with a port 41 tunnel, a nameserver, some hardcoded static routes, and a router advertisement daemon on your existing NAT device?



Mind you a lot of this would be a non-issue if hosts used the DNS
to its full potential by updating their own addresses in the DNS
using SIG(0) signed UPDATE messages when their addresses change.

That would be swell except the DNS server's address changes, too.

R's,
John






[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]