tun6bed4-infra Mailing List for 6bed4
zeroconfig IPv6 tunnel
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
vanrein
You can subscribe to this list here.
2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
From: Rick v. R. <ri...@op...> - 2012-09-23 16:31:57
|
Hello, Please note that the addresses and ports for 6bed4 have been changed. This has been announced quite a while back. The new IPv4 address:port for the server is 145.136.0.1:25788 The new Ipv6 range is 2001:67c:127c::/64 Why change, you ask? These addresses are suitable for anycast; the IPv6-range is a /48 dedicated to 6bed4, and the IPv4 is a /24 dedicated to 6bed4. These prefixes are commonly exchanged in routing tables. Anycast means that multiple providers could offer the service on the same addresses (bidirectionally or unidrectionally). There is a new alpha release that implements these addresses as defaults; they also resolve a number of issues with the previous software. The peer-to-peer function is as agressive as ever :) Please upgrade and let me know any problems you may have. This software will also be announced on RIPE65, where a lecture about 6bed4 will be presented on Tuesday morning; the slides have already been added to the 6bed4 page, http://devel.0cpm.org/6bed4/ Thanks, -Rick |
From: Rick v. R. <ri...@op...> - 2012-03-20 14:01:41
|
Hello, A few weeks ago, I released a second version of the draft for 6bed4. The versions are not completely compatible, so our server currently runs the old and new versions on different ports. As long as I hear about problems with the reference implementation for draft version 01, I will keep the old port open. But if all seems resolved, I will discontinue port 3653 and continue to use 25788 instead. There is no problem AFAIK in keeping the old port open for a few more weeks. Please download the reference implementation for draft 01, and try it. If it works for you, or if not, I'd love to hear it. A lot has changed, specifically the attempts made to directly connect between 6bed4 Peers using the same 6bed4 Router. This means so much for scalability, that the unwelcoming start of the client could now been removed. Cheers, -Rick |
From: Rick v. R. <ri...@op...> - 2011-11-24 13:59:00
|
Hello, We have a single 10 Gb/s node for 6bed4 running at SURFnet. The way they see it, the more traffic it gets the better the story they can tell about IPv6 progress ;-) IPv4 address for the remote tunnel service: 145.100.190.242 IPv6 prefix for the remote tunnel service: 2001:610:188:2001::/64 UDP port for the remote tunnel service: 3653 The addresses used at the moment are not ideal. The IPv4 is from a /24 shared with others, so expect this to change. Maybe the IPv6-range used will also change, and that matters for v01 implementations. Not sharing the /24 for IPv4 and the /48 for IPv6 matters because those are individually routeable prefixes. In other words, these prefixes support true anycast (with multiple locations). If the 6bed4 turns into an RFC, we should get final addresses assigned. Cheers, -Rick |