From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f177.google.com (mail-wi0-f177.google.com [209.85.212.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 203C621F182; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:53:56 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id hm2so1023278wib.10 for ; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:53:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=r+ieFVJpkXnFR1w/ZNGMpEuTMjNXRgCgQf1ukpvjLnE=; b=tBg6T5R2XpBWTn6tVvZwMPmLCvujERbUKUwWPBKf4I7dHGAGjYw1L1S1jJSj23W9pf bJef0SId3mgFF9gKSwIxeRr3Ha5juhesJHzQqyzLO5QkxAjr0w4smlqmZFcWfCRr5v3i PI48oPtNMZrWlriwvlOSNAn5zZRtwbP9kNVaSkjoOb6ZYAjlnHQ3Pm+JbXT/NrVNjzwR /YdKrsEYe/uP0eVR2ch0dCyt+y9+HbTqj3SgMEo8yhIPSb+bzMK5GSWISS9k+vcDrpSG Py9st+DqSoAB5cv7hFfIx3dKdOIOb/BlkDAnRhSLTjF4e7BNUc6/LqSKgGii84Gn2tON F6Lg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.209.77 with SMTP id r55mr5112516weo.81.1355147634695; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:53:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.46.165 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 05:53:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <50C59F7A.7000508@openwrt.org> References: <24882.1355094243@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <50C59F7A.7000508@openwrt.org> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:53:54 +0000 Message-ID: From: Robert Bradley To: cerowrt-users , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c599c1625d8c04d07fe527 Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-users] IPv6 router advertisements on custom interfaces X-BeenThere: cerowrt-users@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Support for user problems regarding cerowrt List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 13:53:57 -0000 --001636c599c1625d8c04d07fe527 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 10 December 2012 08:38, Steven Barth wrote: > > So far the current IPv6-featureset is: > > * Support for native IPv6 with static configuration > * Support for native IPv6 with DHCPv6-Prefix Delegation > * Support for native IPv6 without PD via relaying or masquerading > * Support for 6in4, 6to4 and 6rd > * Prefixes are automatically split up and distributed over > downstream-interfaces OR by choice mapped to an ULA-address (NPT66). > Out of interest, what benefit is there to using NPT66? I understand that people seem to want it, just not what you gain over advertising multiple prefixes. -- Robert Bradley --001636c599c1625d8c04d07fe527 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 10 December 2012 0= 8:38, Steven Barth <cyrus@openwrt.org> wrote:

So far the current IPv6-featureset is:

* Support for native IPv6 with static configuration
* Support for native IPv6 with DHCPv6-Prefix Delegation
* Support for native IPv6 without PD via relaying or masquerading
* Support for 6in4, 6to4 and 6rd
* Prefixes are automatically split up and distributed over downstream-inter= faces OR by choice mapped to an ULA-address (NPT66).

Out of interest, what benefit is there to using NPT66?=C2= =A0 I understand that people seem to want it, just not what you gain over a= dvertising multiple prefixes.
--
Robert Bradley
--001636c599c1625d8c04d07fe527--