[Cerowrt-devel] Current state of ipv6 in openwrt barrier breaker

Steven Barth cyrus at openwrt.org
Wed Dec 12 03:23:11 EST 2012

Hi Ole,

> we need to get the hosts fixed for this.
ideally yes, but judging from experience I don't think that will happen 
(anytime soon).

> right now, given the state of affairs my recommendation would be not not enable ULAs by default.
Hmm I'd agree however I don't like to not have any (non-link-local) 
addresses when there is no uplink. So I think I will keep the current 
workaround (announcing ULA with preferred time 0 as long as there are 
public prefixes) and see how that works.

> I'd really like us to avoid that. it is going to be so hard to get NPT out of the network again.
> it also forces applications to continue with STUN/TURN and all that stuff to discover global addresses
> that can be used for referrals. please let us keep the end to end properties of IPv6 intact.

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with you from a technical and ideological 
standpoint. However I don't think it would be wise - at least as an 
OpenWrt developer - to force any of this ideology onto users. IPv6 NAT 
made it into the Linux kernel so I guess there are some legitimate 
use-cases, so at least I don't want to be the guy assuming I know better 
then the people who implemented, requested and accepted these features.

I'd rather have it implemented and more or less supported in the most 
sane way possible then people hacking it in on their own.

However as I said I feel the need to have reasonable defaults and make 
it easy (easier?) to use the standards-compliant way than to use NAT. 
Thats where I can be reasoned with ;)

More information about the Cerowrt-devel mailing list