You could be right, I was writing from memory and ... tbh, I don't care enough to go look it up again :). They shut down, that's a pain in the butt, I was already on HE anyway, end of story for me. I would do the same here, except that (IMHO) Google's refusal to support DHCPv6 on Android is completely asinine. So my phone still doesn't get an IPv6 address here at home :-(. (Note: Apple products work perfectly.)
It's interesting to speculate about what will happen at some future date when HE turns off (or starts charging for) their tunnel service... I haven't heard anything credible yet, but I assume it'll happen someday. -Adam > -----Original Message----- > From: List [mailto:list-boun...@lists.pfsense.org] On Behalf Of Moshe > Katz > Sent: August 2, 2017 21:38 > To: pfSense Support and Discussion Mailing List <list@lists.pfsense.org> > Subject: Re: [pfSense] IPv6 1:1 NAT problems > > Adam, > > Actually, the reason SIXXS shut down is exactly the opposite of what you > said. SIXXS shut down because IPv6 adoption was going too slow and a > number of ISPs were actually telling their customers "we don't plan to > implement > IPv6 because you can get it from SIXXS if you really want it." In effect, > ISPs were using tunnels as a way of *reducing *IPv6 rollouts. > > Vick, > > I also have an HE tunnel at home because my ISP is dragging their feet > about implementing IPv6. In fact, my main guest WiFi network runs > *only* IPv6. > Most of my guests only care about Gmail and YouTube, and those have > been > IPv6 enabled for ages. It's an experiment to see how many visitors can > get away with not noticing that they have no IPv4 connectivity. > > Moshe > > -- > Moshe Katz > -- mo...@ymkatz.net > -- +1(301)867-3732 <(301)%20867-3732> > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Adam Thompson > <athom...@athompso.net> > wrote: > > > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
