Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 11 Jul 2003 11:03:58 +0900 (JST) | Subject | Re: 2.4.21+ - IPv6 over IPv4 tunneling broken | From | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <> |
| |
In article <1057888154.26854.324.camel@localhost> (at 11 Jul 2003 03:49:14 +0200), Andre Tomt <andre@tomt.net> says:
> Thanks for the explanation, I've been struggling to understand what > Yoshfuji tried to explain to me earlier on this topic (see "IPv6 bugs > introduced in 2.4.21" - ie. my bogus bugreport), now it all makes > perfect sense :-)
Sorry for my poor explanation...
> If you don't have anything but one /64 for example.. I guess /126's > would be ok as you could rule out the the anycast address? It will > probably work with Linux - but is it wrong in any sense, other than > "breaking" with EUI-64/autoconfiguration?
I don't think so, but I won't recoomend doing this. (I even don't assign global addresses to p-t-p interface at all.)
--yoshfuji - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |