We are the ISP and I have a /32 :) I'm simply looking at the best strategy for migrating my subscribers off v4 from the perspective of solving the address utilization crisis while still providing compatibility for those one-off sites and services that are still on v4.
Thanks, Joshua Moore Network Engineer ATC Broadband 912.632.3161 On Jul 5, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Mel Beckman <m...@beckman.org> wrote: >> >> Josh Moore wrote: >> >> Tunnels behind a CPE and 4to6 NAT seem like bandaid fixes as they do not >> give the benefit of true end to end IPv6 connectivity in the sense of every >> device has a one to one global address mapping. > > No, tunnels do give you one to one global IPv6 address mapping for every > device. From a testing perspective, a tunnelbroker works just as if you had > a second IPv6-only ISP. If you're fortunate enough to have a dual-stack ISP > already, you can forgo tunneling altogether and just use an IPv6-capable > border firewall. > > William Waites wrote: >> I was helping my >> friend who likes Apple things connect to the local community >> network. He wanted to use an Airport as his home gateway rather than >> the router that we normally use. Turns out these things can *only* do >> IPv6 with tunnels and cannot do IPv6 on PPPoE. Go figure. So there is >> not exactly a clear path to native IPv6 for your lab this way. > > Nobody is recommending the Apple router as a border firewall. It's terrible > for that. But it's a ready-to-go tunnelbroker gateway. If your ISP can't > deliver IPv6, tunneling is the clear path to building a lab. If you have a > dual-stack ISP already, the clear path is to use an IPv6-capable border > firewall. > > So you are in a maze of non-twisty paths, all alike :)