There was a rumor the 9.1b would be out mid December, but I suppose the QOS issue is causing extra work.
IPv6 native roll on. The stable tunnel is way to slow, the local tunnel is unreliable if it works. I have an IPv6 native connection from an ISP on my portable/test unit, but getting it going is a pain. It works well on the router/modem, but getting the addressing info into the UTM.......[:@][:@] Double nat, not good.
So once my ISP (Verizon FiOS) supports IPv6 native, how is this going to work?
Will they give me a single IPv6 address, or a network range that I can use internally without NAT?
Verizon is supposedly rolling IPv6 out to DHCP customers "Q42012".
Thanks,
Barry
there is much debate on NANOG about how to provision ipv6 CPE and end users. Some providers are going with a default /96(which is the size of the entire current internet pool) some are talking about a /48 even..[:)] considering the ipv6 pool is sooooo huge most likely you'll get a range assigned to you..keep in mind these are dynamic so if you use a large amount of those inside your lan once they change you'll be renumbering all over again. The disruptive aprt is providers are trying to figure out how to make money off hte assignments...with ipv4 being limited they can charge 4-15/month for that static....with ipv6 that induces a HUUUUUge amdin burden(trying to manage a single ip out of millions or more is a chore0...so the days of dynamic assignments at least on ipv6 may be numbered..so to speak.
Hi Barry, if done as per recommendations, you should be assigned a fixed /56, but then the trick is what method they use to assign it and that is where I run into trouble, trying to explain the various processes. The AU ISPs appear to be all allocating /56, anything smaller is against recommendations as /64 should be the smallest network, though there have been some using /128, but hopefully only for the link to the customers equipment. I will try and locate some of the info from the last beta forum.
Ian
IPv6 introduces a number of nightmares as far as being able to limit access to networks. Just because you can limit a fixed IPv6 to MAC address doesn't stop some of the other stateless connections allowing access. In my opinion the way network security is done will need to change from the IPv4 model, I qualify this with my IPv6 experience is very limited.
As a home user on one ISP I get /56 fixed and variable IPv4 which unless your modem is really playing up you keep for a long time even during a couple of reboots. I could pay for a fixed IPv4 address if I felt enthused.
Ian
One of other ISPs I use is still trying 6rd which I might see if I can join into the testing. Forget that idea UTM doesn't do 6rd. That ISP is only allocating /64s because of a limitation in the 6rd software.
The 3rd ISP (3G wireless) is only thinking about IPv6, bit slow these days, used to be a world leader.
