I'm still not sure if my IPv6 connectivity here at home is working
well yet but I plan to start testing next week using BinkD v1.02
(which has been uploaded to Debian unstable and will likely transition
to Debian testing ('Jessie') by next week.
I'm still not sure if my IPv6 connectivity here at home is working
well yet but I plan to start testing next week using BinkD v1.02
(which has been uploaded to Debian unstable and will likely
transition to Debian testing ('Jessie') by next week.
I'm running 1.02 for nearly three months now and haven't got any complaints yet. That version seems to be fine.
I'm still not sure if my IPv6 connectivity here at home is working
well yet but I plan to start testing next week using BinkD v1.02
(which has been uploaded to Debian unstable and will likely transition
to Debian testing ('Jessie') by next week.
for nodelist data use:
root-domain binkp.net
node 2:230/0 * password
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is dual stacked
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
ips should never be in nodelist, this would be a fault
debian :=)
i dont get it either :/
for nodelist data use:
root-domain binkp.net
node 2:230/0 * password
#include <FTA-1006>
Very dangerous advise. All persistent links _should_ be defined explicitly, otherwise you may end up with no connectivity once
something will happen to root-domain (as it once happened to fidonet.net).
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is dual
stacked
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
It is. IPv6 _must_ be tried before IPv4. Changing this precedence is possible, but not advised outside of LANs.
ips should never be in nodelist, this would be a fault
No.
However, using the hostnames is _recommended_.
This brain-dead "OS" may have side-effects even with stable software.
i dont get it either :/IPv6 connectivity, or?
ips should never be in nodelist, this would be a fault
No.
yep it will kill dual stacking
for nodelist data use:
root-domain binkp.net
node 2:230/0 * password
Very dangerous advise. All persistent links _should_ be defined explicitly, otherwise you may end up with no connectivity once
something will happen to root-domain (as it once happened to
fidonet.net).
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is
dual stacked
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
It is. IPv6 _must_ be tried before IPv4. Changing this precedence is possible, but not advised outside of LANs.
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is dual stacked
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
21 Jul 2014 11:01, Rj Clay wrote to All:
I'm still not sure if my IPv6 connectivity here at home is
working well yet but I plan to start testing next week using
BinkD v1.02 (which has been uploaded to Debian unstable and will
likely transition to Debian testing ('Jessie') by next week.
if its not working its fault in nodelist or /etc/gai.conf with
ipv4/ipv6 preferences
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is
dual stacked
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
It is. IPv6 _must_ be tried before IPv4.
Changing this precedence is
possible, but not advised outside of LANs.
23 Jul 2014 01:26:46, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
debian :=)
This brain-dead "OS" may have side-effects even with stable software.
On Monday July 21 2014 11:01, you wrote to All:
I'm still not sure if my IPv6 connectivity here at home is working
well yet but I plan to start testing next week using BinkD v1.02
(which has been uploaded to Debian unstable and will likely transition
to Debian testing ('Jessie') by next week.
When you are unsure about your IPv6 connectivity, why test it with an unstable binkd version? binkd version 1.1a-49 has been well tested by
now with IPv6.
default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
It is. IPv6 _must_ be tried before IPv4.
Why?
Changing this precedence is possible, but not advised outside of
LANs.
Which is where most people are...
You are wrong. Default gai.conf configuration prefers ipv6.
If your distribution comes with gai.conf that prefers ipv4 over ipv6, then distribution maintainers have a brain desease.
Ganbatte, *Benny*!
... GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 (Linux 3.11.5-gentoo CPU UNKNOWN)
if its not working its fault in nodelist or /etc/gai.conf with
ipv4/ipv6 preferences
Won't have an idea until I can do testing...
then binkp will try ipv4/ipv6 as /etc/gai.conf says if node is
dual stacked default is btw ipv4 first, this is not a fault !
It is. IPv6 _must_ be tried before IPv4.Why?
Changing this precedence is
possible, but not advised outside of LANs.
Which is where most people are...
This brain-dead "OS" may have side-effects even with stable software."brain-dead"? Rather that than, for instance, centos...<g>
+1
this is workarounds,
its the same as have 2 hostnames that are single stacked,
will work aswell yes, but badly dns/nodelist waste
it works as designed :/
You are wrong. Default gai.conf configuration prefers ipv6.is your config only have # lines ?, if so its defaults for the vanilla glibc, if your glibc is patched, then its not default ipv6 first
maybe, its opensource so we might both have diffrent problems with defaults :=)
If your distribution comes with gai.conf that prefers ipv4 overi had to edit gai.conf to prefer ipv6 first
ipv6, then distribution maintainers have a brain desease.
... GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 (Linux 3.11.5-gentoo CPU UNKNOWN)oh note unknown :)
From your AKA's, 1:120/546 is the one that carries a host name (bbbb.rocasa.biz) that carries an AAAA record (2001:470:1f11:10b9::13).
I tried to do a binkp connect but it failed.
My binkd can not connect woth IPv4 either I do not undertstand why.
if you have ipv6 native
not via tunnels then there could not be much differing
in ping time, but if ipv6 is on tunnels it could be a big differings,
here, so I'll have to use IPv6 tunnels. I do have some IPv6
connectivity from on my workstation using a teredo tunnel but I don't know reliable it is... (I changed the gai defaults to IPv4 because it
was taking so long to do package updates to the IPv6 connected repositories...)
Before I had to move a couple of years ago, I had an HE tunnel
being managed
by my wrt54gl; I'll be seeing if I can get something working with
that again.
From your AKA's, 1:120/546 is the one that carries a host name
(bbbb.rocasa.biz) that carries an AAAA record (2001:470:1f11:10b9::13).
I tried to do a binkp connect but it failed.
That should be bbbs.rocasa.biz.
The FTN app there doesn't do IPv6 but I was planning to experiment
with IPv6 IP proxies. Obviously I need to get the IPv6 connectivity working first...<g>
My binkd can not connect woth IPv4 either I do not undertstand why.
Wrong IP; that I need to update again...
My ISP here at home (Comcast) does have native IPv6 in some states
but not here, so I'll have to use IPv6 tunnels. I do have some IPv6 connectivity from on my workstation using a teredo tunnel but I don't
know reliable it is...
Before I had to move a couple of years ago, I had an HE tunnel being managed by my wrt54gl; I'll be seeing if I can get something working
with that again.
You've done the right thing. Teredo was a temporary transition
strategy and shouldn't be used anymore.
AFAIK Microsoft is going to shut down their Teredo servers this year.
D:\FIDO\Golded>ping teredo.ipv6.microsoft.com
Ping teredo.ipv6.microsoft.com.nsatc.net [157.56.106.189] mit 32 Bytes Daten:
Zeitberschreitung der Anforderung.
Zeitberschreitung der Anforderung.
Zeitberschreitung der Anforderung.
Zeitberschreitung der Anforderung.
Ping-Statistik fr 157.56.106.189:
Pakete: Gesendet = 4, Empfangen = 0, Verloren = 4 (100% Verlust),
The HE tunnels work quite reliable. I did use one too until I got
native IPv6.
AFAIK Microsoft is going to shut down their Teredo servers this year.
AFAIK Microsoft is going to shut down their Teredo servers this
year.
Could also be caused by a firewall or host settings. A missing echo
reply doesn't imply that there's no host.
Microsoft announced at IETF88 that they are going to shutdown the
Teredo servers the first half of 2014. Maybe they already have.
Be patient! ;) You'll get native IPv6 sooner or later. No worries!
Sysop: | Nelgin |
---|---|
Location: | Plano, TX |
Users: | 509 |
Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
Uptime: | 110:58:25 |
Calls: | 8,194 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 15,442 |
Messages: | 913,245 |
Posted today: | 6 |