On 2011-Jun-06 15:55, Oliver Schad wrote: > Am Monday 06 June 2011 schrieb mir Jeroen Massar: >> The only thing where it might not be compatible is the user interface >> for making it easy to configure them. > > While I agree to your point of view that 6rd and 6to4 are very close to > each other and it shoudln't take much time to implement all necessary > changes in user land and kernel it is still not compatible because you > have to set the prefix. > > So if you look for a CPE or whatever which supports 6to4 you can't > conclude that it supports 6rd. That is what I mean. Remember, the OP was > looking for boxes which supports 6rd and in this context he asked for > 6to4. > > And the answer is no, it isn't true, that support for 6to4 means support > for 6rd.
I did not state that, I did state that if you can configure a static protocol-41 tunnel, you can also configure a 6to4 and a 6rd one, just that you will have to do the prefix calculation yourself and not the easy way in the UI. Greets, Jeroen _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
