Nice. Thanks for the explanation. My IPv6 knowledge is slowly being built up. Not having IPv6 at my home router makes it hard to play with. I've not had the courage to bring "live" my direct allocation at the data center yet.
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 10:22 PM, Adam Thompson <athom...@athompso.net> wrote: > Sadly, yes. Partly due to providers like OVH who don't "get" prefix > delegation. > Also, how else do you multi-home without running BGP? (Keeping in mind > that the overwhelming majority of networks around the world have no access > to BGP.) That's one of the specific use cases for Network Prefix > Translation. (I don't have the RFC handy, sorry.) > -Adam > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Vick > > Khera > > Sent: August 2, 2017 21:20 > > To: pfSense Support and Discussion Mailing List <list@lists.pfsense.org> > > Subject: Re: [pfSense] IPv6 1:1 NAT problems > > > > Is NAT even a thing with IPv6? > > _______________________________________________ > > pfSense mailing list > > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > > _______________________________________________ > pfSense mailing list > https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold > _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
