Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

NAT for IPV6 on FreeBSD 4.7?

  • 12-11-2002 5:34pm
    #1
    Typedef
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,564 ✭✭✭


    Is there a special kernel option I need to turn on to get NAT working for IPV6 on FreeBSD 4.7?

    IPV6IPDIVERT doesn't seem to be a valid config option.

    Anyone?


Comments

  • #2
    flamegrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,862 ✭✭✭flamegrill


    ok well the only IPv6 specific options i can see with anything remotely related for NAT/firewall options are :
    IPV6FIREWALL           
IPV6FIREWALL_VERBOSE
IPV6FIREWALL_VERBOSE_LIMIT=100
IPV6FIREWALL_DEFAULT_TO_ACCEPT

    the IPDIVERT option seems to cover both IPv4 and IPv6, all you can do is try it :)


    Regards,

    Paul


  • #3
    regi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,280 ✭✭✭regi


    Er, isn't one of the goals of IPv6 to get rid of NAT? Or at least, create an environment where NAT is really no longer necessary?


  • #4
    Typedef
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,564 ✭✭✭Typedef


    Must be.

    I came to the conclusion that it must not be necessary, else there would have been an IPV6IPDIVERT option.

    I just thought it would be fun to setup a little IPV6 network in work, so my brain doesn't dribble out through my nose from boredom.

    Aside I noticed a random posting on the ILUG some time back that showed that IPV6 gave less preformance when compared to IPV4, but IPV6 used less processing power to deliever it's performance comparatively speaking.


  • #5
    flamegrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,862 ✭✭✭flamegrill


    Originally posted by Regi
    Er, isn't one of the goals of IPv6 to get rid of NAT? Or at least, create an environment where NAT is really no longer necessary?

    i don't think thats one of the goals to be honest, isnt it to not have the need to be scabby when it comes to address alocation as the IPv4 name space gets smaller and more and more ips are being used, the need for NAT grows. But with IPv6 the need wont be there technically, but it will still exist because of people not wanting or needing more than one public IP address.

    Maybe im wrong :P

    Paul


  • #6
    Baz_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,660 ✭✭✭Baz_


    I think Regi is right tbh


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    flamegrill
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,862 ✭✭✭flamegrill


    OK hehe


  • #8
    longword
    Closed Accounts Posts: 741 ✭✭✭longword


    Originally posted by flamegrill
    But with IPv6 the need wont be there technically, but it will still exist because of people not wanting or needing more than one public IP address.

    Maybe im wrong :P
    You have to understand that the IPv6 address space is unimaginably large. It's "let's assign an address to every grain of sand on every beach, then we'll make a start on every star in the universe" large and then some. If/when ISPs start handing out v6 addresses, they could easily give everyone a /64 network. That means 64 bits for the network address, 64 bits for yourself to play with. The equivalent of four billion complete global IPv4 networks. Just for you personally. Usually it'll be used with 48 of those bits taken from a machine's ethernet MAC address for easy and automatic assignment of a static address, and the remaining bits are left for whatever you want yourself.

    As to the efficiency, since IPv6 headers are longer, the effective bandwidth is going to be few percent lower. However because there are so many bits available for the network part of the IP address, it's much easier for the ISPs and Tier1 providers to design an efficient and hierarchical global network. This leads to much smaller routing tables (lists of "where a packet for this network should go next") in high capacity core routers, making it easier for them to route more packets faster.


Advertisement