So? Neither do I. I don't have native IPv6 at the office either. But both are fully IPv6-connected. That's what Hurricane Electric tunnels are for. (And SIXXS, formerly, but they've decided that IPv6 penetration has reached a point where they're not needed anymore. Hahahaha...)
http://www.tunnelbroker.net/ Disclaimer: my home situation is a bit of an anomaly - the nearest HE IPv6 tunnel endpoint is <5msec away from my home router [wireless, not DSL or cable], and my ISP has a 10Gbps connection to them. Performance is VERY satisfactory. However, even my office, where the nearest HE tunnel endpoint is 30+msec away gets perfectly acceptable performance on IPv6. Largely because IPv6 paths tend to be shorter and transit fewer routers. (There are a number of factors at play; sometimes IPv6 is tunneled over IPv4, which means the path isn't *really* shorter.) -Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Vick > Khera > Sent: August 2, 2017 21:28 > To: pfSense Support and Discussion Mailing List <list@lists.pfsense.org> > Subject: Re: [pfSense] IPv6 1:1 NAT problems > > 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. _______________________________________________ pfSense mailing list https://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list Support the project with Gold! https://pfsense.org/gold
