My internet feed supports ipv4+6, what needs to be done to extend this
to Fidonet, if anything?
My internet feed supports ipv4+6,
what needs to be done to extend this to Fidonet, if anything?
1) A mailer that supports IPv6. Binkd >= v1.0 will do.
2) Establish the IPv6 address of the machine that runs this mailer.
Assuming you run Windows.
Type "IPCONFIG" at the command prompt.
Find the so called SLAAC address of the interface. This is the one
with the lower 64 bits derived from the MAC address.
3) Go to the web site of your DNS provider and ass an AAAA record for
that address/
4) Open port 25554 for IPv6 in your router's firewall/
5) Do the same in the Windows firewall of your Fido machine.
You need to use a mailer that supports IPv6.
BinkD is an excellent choice.
You need to add a AAAA record to the domain name that you have in the nodelist. You need to make sure that the firewall of the router and
server do not block the incoming IPv6 packets on the BinkP port.
Great, thanks.
The AAAA rec might be a problem, but the rest seems doable. :)
In the meantime you can publish your literal IPv6 address here.
You can also try to poll me or other IPv6 enabled nodes.
The domain name from the nodelist is:
fido@odroid:~$ host fido.ricsi.priv.at
fido.ricsi.priv.at has address 62.178.175.238
fido.ricsi.priv.at has IPv6 address 2001:470:21a7:0:c022:9ff:fef2:5fe8
Wishful thinking it seems as WinXP doesn't support ipv6, just Win7 (my
BBS servers are all under XP atm).
Wishful thinking it seems as WinXP doesn't support ipv6
In the meantime you can publish your literal IPv6 address here.2001:0:9d38:6ab8:c21:e17:b3b7:fcbc I did open the ipv6 ports for
BinkD
Wishful thinking it seems as WinXP doesn't support ipv6, just Win7 (my
BBS servers are all under XP atm).
Win XP (from SP2 IIRC) supports IPv6. But... it is not enabled by
default.
Type "ipv6 install" at the command prompt.
Hey! I'm running WinXP (and has been constantly been belittled for
it :) ) and I've been on IPv6 for soon to be ten years. 8-)
Bjorn Felten wrote to Ben Ritchey <=-
Hey! I'm running WinXP (and has been constantly been belittled for
it :) ) and I've been on IPv6 for soon to be ten years. 8-)
Ben Ritchey wrote to All <=-
My internet feed supports ipv4+6, what needs to be done to extend this
to Fidonet, if anything?
Ben Ritchey wrote to Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
Great, thanks. The AAAA rec might be a problem, but the rest seems
doable. :)
Ben Ritchey wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-
Wishful thinking it seems as WinXP doesn't support ipv6, just Win7 (my
BBS servers are all under XP atm).
Cool, it worked {chuckle} but which addy do I use?
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::203:ffff:fe2c:6191%5
Win XP (from SP2 IIRC) supports IPv6. But... it is not enabled by
default.
Type "ipv6 install" at the command prompt.
Cool, it worked {chuckle} but which addy do I use?
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : lusfiber.net
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.124
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::203:ffff:fe2c:6191%5
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection 2:
Media State . . . . . . . . . . . : Media disconnected
Tunnel adapter Teredo Tunneling Pseudo-Interface:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . :
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::ffff:ffff:fffd%4
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
Tunnel adapter Automatic Tunneling Pseudo-Interface:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : lusfiber.net
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::5efe:192.168.1.124%2
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . :
You are missing a global address.
Do you have a radvd active?
Your IPv6 router needs to send router advertisements with your subnet address. When an IPv6 host receives those, it will generate a global
IPv6 address with that subnet address.
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . :
fe80::203:ffff:fe2c:6191%5
You are missing the global address.
The fe80 address is a link-local address.
It is only valid on that Ethernet link.
You need one with a global scope!
Enable the advertisments on your IPv6 router.
You need one with a global scope!Ok, I'll look ... nada for ads on router setting. :(
Enable the advertisments on your IPv6 router.
There is an IPv6 address. But... is is just a so called link local address. They all start with fe80:: It is the IPv6 brother of the 192.168.x.y IPv4 addresses. It is only valid on the local link. So you have a computer that is IPv6 capable, but it does not have a
connection to the IPv6 outside world yet.
Your router should broadcast so called "router advertisments". The
devices connected to that router are assigned globaly routable IPv6 adresses from those router advertisements. It seems your router does
not broadcast router advertisements...
Hmmm... what's that option called? Don't see anything :( I have a
Linksys WRT3200ACM if that helps. {chuckle}
Hmmm... what's that option called? Don't see anything :( I have aWith OpenWRT/LEDE or with the stock firmware?
Linksys WRT3200ACM if that helps. {chuckle}
If stock firmware then sorry ... no clue about that.
Ben Ritchey wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Ok, thanks Tony :)
Ben Ritchey wrote to Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
Windows IP Configuration
Ethernet adapter Local Area Connection:
Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : lusfiber.net
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.124
Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0
IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : fe80::203:ffff:fe2c:6191%5
Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1
Ben Ritchey wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-
Yeah, stock :( Actually I have two IPV6 addresses to manage. My router
is cascaded off another one that points to mine with a Win7 ipv6 addy.
My local Linksys points to VM for BinkD. Win7 shows a valid ipv6 addy I used to
pass the BinkD ports on 1st router to Win7. Now I need to pass second router somehow. lol
Yeah, stock :( Actually I have two IPV6 addresses to manage. My
router is cascaded off another one that points to mine with a Win7
ipv6 addy.
My local Linksys points to VM for BinkD. Win7 shows a valid ipv6 addy
I used to pass the BinkD ports on 1st router to Win7. Now I need to
pass second router somehow. lol
Your router should broadcast so called "router advertisments".
The devices connected to that router are assigned globaly
routable IPv6 adresses from those router advertisements. It seems
your router does not broadcast router advertisements...
Hmmm... what's that option called? Don't see anything :( I have a
Linksys WRT3200ACM if that helps. {chuckle}
Actually I have two IPV6 addresses to manage. My router is cascaded
off another one that points to mine with a Win7 ipv6 addy.
My local Linksys points to VM for BinkD.
Win7 shows a valid ipv6 addy I used to pass the BinkD ports on 1st
router to Win7. Now I need to pass second router somehow. lol
Sounds like you need routers supporting RA (router advertisements) and
PD (prefix delegation). Best bet would be some TP-Link running
OpwenWrt or LEDE.
Hmmm... what's that option called? Don't see anything :( I have a
Linksys WRT3200ACM if that helps. {chuckle}
I'm confused as to how your network is setup (and why). :)
Bjorn Felten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'm confused as to how your network is setup (and why). :)
Me2.
I too have one single contact point to the big bad internet and everything behind it is handled locally.
And yes, I know that everybody is telling me that having that single contact point being handled by an old WinXP box is a really bad idea,
but it has worked for me for almost two decades now, so obviously it's doable... 8-)
Don't know if I will ever see the day when I'm down to a single IPv6 network with firewalling to support HAMnet equivalent functions on
IPv6, but here's hoping. I suspect IPv4 will linger in some form for
many years, even if we're all running IPv6 only or DS-Lite at home.
Having said that I think it will be doable to run my Fidonet system on
a DS-Lite connection. With 50+ IPv6 capable nodes, the IPv6 fidonet
club is near reaching "critical mass". ... I think...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I foresee that if I stay with my present ISP, I will be on a DS-Lite connection between now and five years. My ISP (Ziggo) is now a
daughterof Liberty global and their policy seems to be that all
consumer connection will DS-Lite. I have dual stack now, but I do not expect that to last forever...
Having said that I think it will be doable to run my Fidonet system on
a DS-Lite connection. With 50+ IPv6 capable nodes, the IPv6 fidonet
club is near reaching "critical mass". ... I think...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to All <=-
And to put my money where my mouth is, I will run the following test
from 11:00 UTC until 18:00 UTC this afternoon:
o My binkd server will only answer on IPv6.
o I will poll all my IPv4 only links every 30 minutes.
Please don't be disappointed if everything works fine ;)
I suspect I will have somewhat longer, because my ISP has
traditionally catered to a more tech savvy clientele, which is one
reason they were early with IPv6, and why I believe they will maintain IPv4 for as long as it provides significant benefits.
Having said that I think it will be doable to run my Fidonet
system on a DS-Lite connection. With 50+ IPv6 capable nodes, the
IPv6 fidonet club is near reaching "critical mass". ... I
think...
I think that point is approaching. You could certainly be provided an IPv6 feed from 50+ nodes nowadays.
Please don't be disappointed if everything works fine ;)
And next time remove the A record. ;)
[17304] BEGIN, binkd/1.1a-95/Linux -p -P 280/5555 /etc/binkd/binkd
[17304] creating a poll for 2:280/5555@fidonet (`d' flavour)
[17304] clientmgr started
[17305] call to 2:280/5555@fidonet
[17305] trying f5555.n280.z2.binkp.net [2001:1c02:1100:fd00:215:60
[17305] connected
[19208] BEGIN, binkd/1.1a-95/OS2 -p -P 280/5555 binkd_client.cfg
[19208] creating a poll for 2:280/5555@fidonet (`d' flavour)
[19208] clientmgr started
[19209] call to 2:280/5555@fidonet
[19209] trying f5555.n280.z2.binkp.net via proxy 192.168.1.16:8118
[19209] connected
[19209] connected to proxy rpi.localnet:8118
Please don't be disappointed if everything works fine ;)
o My binkd server will only answer on IPv6.
o I will poll all my IPv4 only links every 30 minutes.
Good luck with the test. Sounds like it should work.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I suspect I will have somewhat longer, because my ISP has
traditionally catered to a more tech savvy clientele, which is one
reason they were early with IPv6, and why I believe they will maintain IPv4 for as long as it provides significant benefits.
The real test is of course "how long will they continue to provide IPv4 when it stops being profitable?"
So far so good...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Good luck with the test. Sounds like it should work.
It did! ;-)
Good luck with the test. Sounds like it should work.
It did! ;-)
That's good to hear. Do you have many IPv6 capable links?
I have at least a couple, including my main Fido feed (you can
probably guess who that is from the IPv6 list). :)
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I have 18 IPv6 capable links. I could entice a few more sysops to link with me I think...
I have at least a couple, including my main Fido feed (you can
probably guess who that is from the IPv6 list). :)
I can make an educated guess.. ;-)
There is one thing that won't work when I go DS-Lite. The connection
with my point system when I am on the move. My 3G dongle is IPv4 only
and WiFi networks supporting IPv6 are still quite rare. So I may have
to install a tunnel on my laptop. One that works from behind NAT,
because being behind a NAT is the usual situation on a public WiFi network. Cheers, Michiel
There is one thing that won't work when I go DS-Lite. The connection
with my point system when I am on the move. My 3G dongle is IPv4 only
and WiFi networks supporting IPv6 are still quite rare. So I may have
to install a tunnel on my laptop. One that works from behind NAT,
because being behind a NAT is the usual situation on a public WiFi
network.
That is a good point. You could try something like OpenVPN (I'm sure it supports IPv6 inside tunnels).
Tommi Koivula wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
That is a good point. You could try something like OpenVPN (I'm sure it supports IPv6 inside tunnels).
It may not work if the server side is ipv6-only and the client is
natted ipv4-only. He may need some third-party storage for fido
bundles, like ftp server or cloud. Or another fido system to route his mail bundles. ;)
Or use teredo. :D
Or use teredo. :D
I thought that was dead and buried. Didn't Microsoft close down
their Teredo servers? Did anyone else have any running?
Tommi Koivula wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I thought that was dead and buried. Didn't Microsoft close down
their Teredo servers? Did anyone else have any running?
My comment was meant to be a joke, but it is still there. And it works!
My comment was meant to be a joke, but it is still there. And it
works!
Hmm, obviously Teredo still does work!
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
So some things seem to work, but binkp IPv6 over Teredo does not work.
I can make a binkp poll over teredo.
Maybe the belgians at the camping are blocking your binkp?
So some things seem to work, but binkp IPv6 over Teredo does not
work.
Hmm, interesting. Looks like more testing needed. Something not easy
to do here, as I'm already native. Would have to tether something to
the phone to test, or use a different site (I have access to at least
one network without IPv6).
I can make a binkp poll over teredo.
Maybe the belgians at the camping are blocking your binkp?
It seems to be a DNS problem. When I enter your literal IPv6 address
in binkd's config instead op using binkp.net, it works:
I can also call my own system using the literal IPv6 address...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
An AYIYA SixXs tunnel works from behind NAT. I tested that many years ago. I considered transfering my SixXs tunnel to my laptop whe I got an he.net tunnel at home. Too late now, SixXs closes shop in a month.
At home I could test using my FON spot or my 3G dongle. They are IPv4 only..
I can also call my own system using the literal IPv6 address...
But the connection is slow, unstable and unreliable...
An AYIYA SixXs tunnel works from behind NAT. I tested that many
years ago. I considered transfering my SixXs tunnel to my laptop
whe I got an he.net tunnel at home. Too late now, SixXs closes
shop in a month.
Yes, that would have been an option years ago, but not now, with SixXs
all but closed.
At home I could test using my FON spot or my 3G dongle. They are
IPv4 only..
Perfect for testing. :)
I can also call my own system using the literal IPv6 address...
But the connection is slow, unstable and unreliable...
Yep. It may be used as a last backup connection only.
Never let your public ipv4 address go. :)
It seems to be a DNS problem. When I enter your literal IPv6
address in binkd's config instead op using binkp.net, it works:
I can also call my own system using the literal IPv6 address...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
My estimate is that I will have a couple of years before it becomes an issue. I have plenty of time to find an alternative. Maybe IPv6 will be common for public WiFi by then. Who knows.
My estimate is that I will have a couple of years before it
becomes an issue. I have plenty of time to find an alternative.
Maybe IPv6 will be common for public WiFi by then. Who knows.
Surely mobile Internet should go IPv6 sooner or later.
That does seem to be a big hole in coverage. I suspect, assuming I
stay with the same ISP, I have at least 5-10 years of IPv4
connectivity. By then, I'm sure I will have plentiful options.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Of course. But I find it hard to put a timeline on it. Mobile devices seldom host servers, so the demand for incoming capability will not be
as large as for fixed connections. 99.9% of mobile cutomers can live
with CGNAT IPv4 only I guess.
That does seem to be a big hole in coverage. I suspect, assuming I
stay with the same ISP, I have at least 5-10 years of IPv4
connectivity. By then, I'm sure I will have plentiful options.
We will. The WiFi on the camping here has just been totally replaced.
It is brand new. But although the ISP (Belgacom) that privides the connection, offers IPv6, the WiFI is IPv4 only and since it is brand
nes, I do not expect it to be replaced in the coming five years.
Of course. But I find it hard to put a timeline on it. Mobile
devices seldom host servers, so the demand for incoming
capability will not be as large as for fixed connections. 99.9%
of mobile cutomers can live with CGNAT IPv4 only I guess.
I'd rather see DS-Lite, at least we get IPv6 connectivity, and
outbound access to IPv4.
The WiFi on the camping here has just been totally replaced. It is
brand new. But although the ISP (Belgacom) that provides the
connection, offers IPv6, the WiFI is IPv4 only and since it is brand
new, I do not expect it to be replaced in the coming five years.
Yes, still a lot of short sighted moves happening. :/
I have disabled isatap. Now I can call IPv6 nodes by host name.It seems to be a DNS problem. When I enter your literal IPv6I can also call my own system using the literal IPv6 address...
address in binkd's config instead op using binkp.net, it works:
Sometimes it is just magic....
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I'd rather see DS-Lite, at least we get IPv6 connectivity, and
outbound access to IPv4.
I'd prefer that too but I have not heard of any plans from any of the mobile providers here yet.
Yes, still a lot of short sighted moves happening. :/
Can't blame the camping boss I'd say. He knows nothing about IPv6, he just hires some "specialist" to install WifI that covers the area with reasonable speed. And that it does. And as long as the guests don't complain...
OTOH, in les that two weeks, I will be on a camping where theW WiFi is IPv6. Has been there for three years now. The camping boss doesn't know it. Het got a Fritzbox from Xs4All and installed some dumb WiFi repeaters. Not all that fast, but those dumb WiFi repeaters are IP version agnostic. So if the main feed is IPv6, so is the rest. ;-)
I'd prefer that too but I have not heard of any plans from any
of the mobile providers here yet.
Yeah, I don't think the mobile providers here have gone that way yet either.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Because 99.9% of the mobile customers can do everything they want from behind an IPv4 only CGNAT.
But then... IP cameras and other "domotics" are gaining ground. So people on the move will be able to access their camera to see who is parking on their driveway. And when they have DS-Lite at home, and they don't want to have all their data uploaded to a server in the cloud,
they will need IPv6 when on the move.
And that will put pressure on both the mobile providers and the owners
of hotels and campings that offer WiFi to their guests.
in progress...
MvdV> Nothing yet.in progress...
You should not try to make contact with Bennies system between 00:00
and 01:00 apparently his system is in maintenace mode then, and
connects are not accepted.
MvdV> + 00:37 [3872] call to 2:230/38@fidonet
MvdV> 00:37 [3872] trying f38.n230.z2.binkp.net [62.66.148.112]...
MvdV> 00:37 [3872] connected
MvdV> + 00:37 [3872] outgoing session with f38.n230.z2.binkp.net:24554
MvdV> [62.66.148.112] ? 00:38 [3872] recv: connection closed by foreign
You should not try to make contact with Bennies system between 00:00 and
01:00 apparently his system is in maintenace mode then, and connects are
not accepted.
His system has been broken for a long time, he is not IBN-compliant. I have asked him to fix this or remove the IBN flag, but he keeps telling it works..
Last time I checked, he had IFC mailer in port 24554. BinkD is not IFC-mailer, so it cannot connect, however for example Radius can.
Right now, no answer at all.
Host,230,Denmark,Jersore_DK,Benny_Pedersen,-Unpublished-,300,IBN,INA:themu l tixpoint.junc.eu,XA,MO,CM,U,NPK,NEC ,38,Xpoint_Linode,London_UK,Benny_Peder sen,-Unpublished-,300,IBN,INA:themultixpoint.junc.eu,XA,MO,CM
His system has been broken for a long time, he is not IBN-compliant. I have asked him to fix this or remove the IBN flag, but he keeps telling it works..
Last time I checked, he had IFC mailer in port 24554. BinkD is not IFC-mailer, so it cannot connect, however for example Radius can.
Right now, no answer at all.
Host,230,Denmark,Jersore_DK,Benny_Pedersen,-Unpublished-,300,IBN,INA:t hemultixpoint.junc.eu,XA,MO,CM,U,NPK,NEC ,38,Xpoint_Linode,London_UK,Benny_Pedersen,-Unpublished-,300,IBN,INA:t hemultixpoint.junc.eu,XA,MO,CM
His system has been broken for a long time, he is not IBN-compliant. I have asked him to fix this or remove the IBN flag, but he keeps
telling it works..
Last time I checked, he had IFC mailer in port 24554. BinkD is not IFC-mailer, so it cannot connect, however for example Radius can.
Right now, no answer at all.
Indeed, it's down for now. So if he's IFC, why can't replace one flag
in nodelist?
Indeed, it's down for now. So if he's IFC, why can't replace one flagits complicated, i think xinetd cant handle ifc and and others in same port, but it can handle mulple remote protocol on same ports, hmm
in nodelist?
i have changed to -a binkp now, lets see if -a auto is buggy or not,
sadly this removes emsi on same port support :/
Why do you want both ifc and ibn on same port? It's non-standard.
It works for now:
27-Jan-2018 03:56:00 CONNECT To 62.66.148.112 #24554 (2:230/38) 27-Jan-2018 03:56:01 Disconnect from 62.66.148.112 - Complete
(2:230/38) IN: 0 (0b) OUT: 0 (0b)
please tell me my error now ?
hope others would comfirm it works now
please tell me my error now ?
No error anymore. :)
hope others would comfirm it works now
But still no IPv6 ;(
my current isp want there shit router, not a much simplier adsl modem without router, so its not possible to make dmz lan forwards off all ports, lame !
will change isp becurse of that soon
hope others would comfirm it works now
But still no IPv6 ;(
this is not a error
Well, you still can forward other ports manually, if you forwarded
24554 successfully. It's only 2 more ports.
I'd recommend you to find some ethernet, fiber optic, at least, PON.
ADSL is so ancient now.
this is not a errorHmm.. Ask the moderator of this echo. :D
BP>> this is not a error
TK> Hmm.. Ask the moderator of this echo. :D
well if one like to help show me a xinetd redirector :=)
please tell me my error now ?
yep, my point is that protokol different ports is not needed to
support multi protocol streams, it will even work on modems, or have
users today never seen a modem ?
But still no IPv6 ;(
this is not a error
well if one like to help show me a xinetd redirector :=)This is what I have in my Asus RT-N16 dd-wrt router: :=)
root@RT-N16:~# cat /opt/etc/xinetd.d/binkd-v6
service binkd24554
{
type = UNLISTED
port = 24554
bind = 2001:470:27:a::2
socket_type = stream
wait = no
user = nobody
redirect = 192.168.1.2 24554
}
ipv6 only nodes cannot connect to you, i solved this yesterday
so we will miss W@rd at that time :)
Don't count your blessings, I expect, that his ISP already provides IPv6, but no IPv6 compatible hardware is connect to the line yet.
There is a good chance, that if he would e.g. connect a faily
current AMV-Fritz! to his adsl line, IPv6 will be there.
BE is high on the list of IPv6 rollout.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Benny Pedersen <=-
Presently there are no true IPv6 only nodes. All IPv6 capable nodes
still have outgoing IPv4 capability and that will probably remain so
for a long time. So the added value of IPv6 incoming only is marginal
as long as you still have incoming IPv4 capability. With incoming IPv4 capability one is still reachable by all.
As it is, outgoing IPv6 is more usefull. You need that to connect to nodes that no longer have IPv4 incoming capability. Those will come...
Benny Pedersen wrote to Kees van Eeten <=-
There is a good chance, that if he would e.g. connect a faily
current AMV-Fritz! to his adsl line, IPv6 will be there.
dont know it
As it is, outgoing IPv6 is more usefull. You need that to
connect to nodes that no longer have IPv4 incoming capability.
Those will come...
The setup of my network makes it more likely that I could become temporarily IPv6 only (incoming and outgoing), because my BBS IPv4 addresses come via an OpenVPN tunnel, while IPv6 is native.
So IPv6 outgoing only can be useful for getting in contact with me if things break.
Same for incoming only, because I would lost all IPv6 connectivity in
this situation.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
So, let me get this straight. You have a native IPv6 connection with
your ISP and your IPv4 connection is via a tunnel. The reverse of what
I have been doing with my 6in4 he.net tunnel that I used before I got native IPv6 from my ISP. Right?
So when that tunnel folds, you no longer have IPv4 incoming on the advertised addresses. Right?
So IPv6 outgoing only can be useful for getting in contact with me if things break.
Right.
Same for incoming only, because I would lost all IPv6 connectivity in
this situation.
s/IPv6/IPv4/ ?
But... your basic connection is not really IPv6 only is it? If it is
you would be rather unique. AFAIK, no end user has an IPv6 only connection yet. It is either Dual Satck or DS-Lite. In either case you still have outgoing IPv4 capabiity. No?
The setup of my network makes it more likely that I could become temporarily IPv6 only (incoming and outgoing), because my BBS IPv4addresses come
via an OpenVPN tunnel, while IPv6 is native.
So IPv6 outgoing only can beonly,
useful for getting in contact with me if things break. Same for incoming
because I would lost all IPv6 connectivity in this situation.
So, let me get this straight. You have a native IPv6 connection
with your ISP and your IPv4 connection is via a tunnel. The
reverse of what I have been doing with my 6in4 he.net tunnel
that I used before I got native IPv6 from my ISP. Right?
Pretty close. The IPv4 tunnel is actually carried on IPv4 via the router's NAT.
I got the tunnel, because I wanted multiple public IPv4 addresses.
So when that tunnel folds, you no longer have IPv4 incoming on
the advertised addresses. Right?
Same for incoming only, because I would lost all IPv6
connectivity in this situation.
s/IPv6/IPv4/ ?
Yep, oops typo lol.
But... your basic connection is not really IPv6 only is it? If
it is you would be rather unique. AFAIK, no end user has an IPv6
only connection yet. It is either Dual Satck or DS-Lite. In
either case you still have outgoing IPv4 capabiity. No?
It's dual stack, it's just because of how the actual IPs for the BBSs
are obtained (as additional IPs) there is this quirk.
@MSGID: 2:221/6.0 5a70a436
@PID: JamNNTPd/Cygwin32 1.3 20180119
@CHRS: IBMPC 2
@TZUTC: 0200
Michiel van der Vlist wrote:
@MSGID: 239.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1ed58d3d
My software (Fmail, Golded) does not like your not FTS-0009 complient
MSGID. It breaks the reply linking.. :(
No such problems with HPT.
Benny Pedersen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
then make a openvpn on ipv4 when you have ipv6 native :=)
So IPv6 outgoing only can be
useful for getting in contact with me if things break. Same for incoming
only,
because I would lost all IPv6 connectivity in this situation.
it will not break if you can make ipv6 tunnels on top of ipv4, you
could make ipv4 tunnels on top of ipv6 aswell
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
BBSs are incoming only. So if the tunnel is off-line, your BBS users could only use IPv6 to connect to your BBS.
Your mailers however are both client and server. They could still use
the IPv4 address from the dual stack connection for outgoing
connections. (if so confugured).
BTW...
@MSGID: 239.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1ed58d3d
My software (Fmail, Golded) does not like your not FTS-0009 complient MSGID. It breaks the reply linking.. :(
BTW...
@MSGID: 239.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1ed58d3d
My software (Fmail, Golded) does not like your not FTS-0009 complient
MSGID. It breaks the reply linking.. :(
Complain to the author of Synchronet. ;)
then make a openvpn on ipv4 when you have ipv6 native :=)I don't follow.
So IPv6 outgoing only can be useful for getting in contact with me if things break. Same for
incoming only, because I would lost all IPv6 connectivity in this situation.
it will not break if you can make ipv6 tunnels on top of ipv4, you
could make ipv4 tunnels on top of ipv6 aswell
True, but the other end terminates on IPv4.
We could make it terminate on IPv6, in theory, as they do have IPv6 theirend, but
if it ain't broke... ;)
When using JAM, the bad format of MSGID doesn't matter, JAM has
MSGIDcrc and REPLYcrc, which can be used in reply linking. "hpt link
-j".
When using JAM, the bad format of MSGID doesn't matter, JAM has
MSGIDcrc and REPLYcrc, which can be used in reply linking. "hpt link
-j".
----- hptlink.log begins -----
---------- Wed 31 Jan 18, hptlink/lnx 1.4.0-sta 18-04-08
F 09:58:55 hptlink/lnx 1.4.0-sta 18-04-08
----- hptlink.log ends -----
hpt link -j does nothing here
Your mailers however are both client and server. They could
still use the IPv4 address from the dual stack connection for
outgoing connections. (if so confugured).
Not by default, because the default gateway configuration has to be changed on the BBS machine. The tunnel does not terminate on the main router.
True, but the other end terminates on IPv4. We could make it
terminate on IPv6, in theory, as they do have IPv6 their end, but if
it ain't broke... ;)
... I give up, what is the meaning of life?
I didn't say hptlink, I said hpt link. ;)
Usage: hpt [-c config] [options]
hpt link [areamask] - link messages
hpt link -j [areamask] - link jam areas using CRC (quicker)
@MSGID: 239.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1ed58d3d
My software (Fmail, Golded) does not like your not FTS-0009
complient MSGID. It breaks the reply linking.. :(
Complain to the author of Synchronet. ;)
It has been done. He doesn't care. ;(
@MSGID: 239.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1ed58d3d
My software (Fmail, Golded) does not like your not FTS-0009
complient MSGID. It breaks the reply linking.. :(
Complain to the author of Synchronet. ;)
It has been done. He doesn't care. ;(
About two weeks ago a node with Synchronet caused tons of echomail re-posted from a R24 echo to an international echo. And the Synchronet version was up to date. It seems the author has reintroduced the same bug we had fun with end of last year. That software is an unmitigated disaster :(
would you mind remove ipv4 in your fidonet hostname then so its
only ipv6 ? :=)
my zte blade v6 with android 5.0.1 and hotdoged resolved fine themultixpoint.junc.eu to my ipv6 ip, but the phone have only 10.x.x.x
ip address, i blame my isp supporting only dns ipv6, and not yet ipv6 route via huawei router
sure if we now only had ipv6 fullrate.dk would not have ipv4 anymore,
just ask them about why it still miss ipv6, if it had it would show
there router bugs, support says i am the only one have the problem :/
idiots anywhere
would you mind remove ipv4 in your fidonet hostname then so its only
ipv6 ? :=)
my zte blade v6 with android 5.0.1 and hotdoged resolved fine
themultixpoint.junc.eu to my ipv6 ip, but the phone have only 10.x.x.x
ip address, i blame my isp supporting only dns ipv6, and not yet ipv6
route via huawei router
AFAIK, no mobile ISP in Europe offers IPv6 yet.
Yes. The worst thing was that people installed the totally untested "bugfixed" and "updated" versions into production.
would you mind remove ipv4 in your fidonet hostname then so its
only ipv6 ? :=)
I had that once at 2:221/6. Also Michiel has been running tests as an ipv6 only node.
You're late. :D
MvdV> No argument there.idiots anywhere
AFAIK, no mobile ISP in Europe offers IPv6 yet.
I have a mobile internet connection with native ipv6 AND public ipv4
at the same time. The ISP is called DNA.
When I last checked, Finland still was part of Europe. ;)
itAFAIK, no mobile ISP in Europe offers IPv6 yet.
I have a mobile internet connection with native ipv6 AND public ipv4
at the same time. The ISP is called DNA.
Interesting. So your mobile ISP has seen the light. How does it work? Is
a fully fledged Dual Stack connection that gives you the same as a fixed Dual Stack line? Does your mobile device just get a /128 or are you assigned a prefix where you can allocate subnets yourself somehow?
Tell us more...
The only traffic limitation by isp is that all ports <1024 are blocked in.
01 Feb 2018 14:41, Tommi Koivula wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
The only traffic limitation by isp is that all ports <1024 are blocked
in.
this is normal for dynamic ips
Tommi Koivula wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Complain to the author of Synchronet. ;)
It has been done. He doesn't care. ;(
When using JAM, the bad format of MSGID doesn't matter, JAM has
MSGIDcrc and REPLYcrc, which can be used in reply linking. "hpt link
-j".
How does Fmail handle the linking?
Benny Pedersen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
then make a openvpn on ipv4 when you have ipv6 native :=)I don't follow.
does that mean i am behind ? :=)
if it ain't broke... ;)
continue use ipv4
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Your router does IPv4 NAT, doesn't it? So every machine will get an RFC1918 IPv4 address won't it?
Have you configured your mailers to only use the VPN tunnel for IPv4?
Oh well, who cares, IPv4 is technology on the way out. In ten years it will be a non-issue anyway. ;-)
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
"Don't fix it if it ain't broke". If "ain't broke" just means "it still works" then I disagree. Predicting is difficultm especially if it is about the future, but us humans do have the abilty to make some predictions about the future and sometimes we can predict that although something works now, it will not continue to so so forever unless we do something. It is why we do preventive maintenance.
I say IPv4 /is/ broke. It has run out of addresses and we have to
resort to ever more complex work arounds to keep it working.
IPv6 is the future. IPv4 is broke, let's get rid of it. ;-)
... I give up, what is the meaning of life?
42.
Tommi Koivula wrote to Benny Pedersen <=-
this is normal for dynamic ips
IMHO normal is that 25,137-139,445 etc are blocked in. Not all lower ports.
My ipv4-only ADSL line has 5 dynamic ip's, all ports open in.
this is normal for dynamic ipsIMHO normal is that 25,137-139,445 etc are blocked in. Not all lower ports.
My ipv4-only ADSL line has 5 dynamic ip's, all ports open in.
How does Fmail handle the linking?
I do it in my head. :D Seriously, that is the main reason why I
prefer BBSs over web forums, because I beed to be able to at least
skim enough messages to get an idea where threads are going. That's
_really_ difficult to do with modern forums, because they are so
slow. Give me an offline reader anyday. :)
My ipv4-only ADSL line has 5 dynamic ip's, all ports open in.
oh, less secureiry then, but still you could make sure services does
not listen on wan interface, sadly smb listen on anyip :/
sure, but why not keep it ?
Tell us more...
I have the sim card installed in a mobile router (Huawei E5577s). It
works as any router, it gets public ipv4 address from isp as well as
the /64 ipv6 prefix which will be delegated to lan clients.
The public ipv4 address may change few times a day of it may stay unchanged for a week. Also the /64 prefix changes when ipv4 address changes.
The only traffic limitation by isp is that all ports <1024 are blocked
in.
Have you configured your mailers to only use the VPN tunnel for
IPv4?
It's a matter of routing. I would have to have a reliable means of detecting when the tunnel was down, so I can reconfigure the routing.
Oh well, who cares, IPv4 is technology on the way out. In ten
years it will be a non-issue anyway. ;-)
I have a suspicion it's gonna linger a lot longer, though IPv6 should gradually dominate.
2. This ISP is one where they communicate well with users, and they
don't assume users are ignorant of tech issues. In fact, they
probably have the highest proportion of tech savvy users of any ISP. Therefore, any such change in the future is likely to be well communicated. They are also likely to keep dual stack going as long
as feasible.
3. This also requires liaison with the group running the other end of
the tunnel.
Liklihood is it's far enough in the future that one or both ends will
see a generational change of hardware, and there will be a more
compelling reason to upgrade and change things around other than
"because I can" or "future proofing", and that time is going to be a better time to make the change. :)
I say IPv4 /is/ broke. It has run out of addresses and we have
to resort to ever more complex work arounds to keep it working.
True.
Ever heard of firewalls? ;-)
The only traffic limitation by isp is that all ports <1024 are blocked
in.
this is normal for dynamic ips
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
It's a matter of routing. I would have to have a reliable means of detecting when the tunnel was down, so I can reconfigure the routing.
I have a suspicion it's gonna linger a lot longer, though IPv6 should gradually dominate.
Hence the smiley. I admit 10 years is quit a bit of wishful thinking. OTOH, predicting the future is difficult and it would not be the first time the the world changes faster than I predicted....
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Perhaps as long as they exist. My first ISP was HCCnet. An ISP created
by the Hobby Compter Club. They were very tech friendly. But they were small. And the small ones get eaten by the big ones. That was the end tech friendly...
Perhaps. Trying to look too far in the future is not always fruitful. Yes, I agree that in your case it probably makes sense to wait a
while...
I say IPv4 /is/ broke. It has run out of addresses and we have
to resort to ever more complex work arounds to keep it working.
True.
So we agree on that. Good!
Benny Pedersen wrote to Tommi Koivula <=-
Hello Tommi!
02 Feb 2018 08:31, Tommi Koivula wrote to Benny Pedersen:
Ever heard of firewalls? ;-)
ever heard of binding ? :)
firewalls is last resort on problems not possible to solve otherwize:=)
mark lewis wrote to Benny Pedersen <=-
this is normal for dynamic ips
no it isn't... i've had dynamic IP ever since internet arrived in my area... no
ports have ever been blocked by my ISP /and/ i can run servers without having to have a commercial account...
Ever heard of firewalls? ;-)ever heard of binding ? :)
firewalls is
last resort on problems not possible to solve
otherwize :=)
area... no ports have ever been blocked by my ISP /and/ i can run
servers without having to have a commercial account...
We were talking about port 445 - Windows SMB sharing. Unless there's some really obscure registry hack I've never heard off, I don't know howto
make that listen on specific interfaces/IPs.
Sure on *NIX using Samba, you could do
it, but the vast majority of machines using this port are Windows
boxes. Firewalling is your only option.
firewalls is last resort on problems not possible to solve otherwize:=)
And this is one of them. :)
Benny Pedersen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
i have not found anything there either
Sure on *NIX using Samba, you could do
it, but the vast majority of machines using this port are Windows
boxes. Firewalling is your only option.
i am not smb expert, just think is sad to see hospitals in england got compromised by smb protocol not secure enouh for real life, its so sad
to see microsoft have software not real tested in real life before sold
to custommers
firewalls is last resort on problems not possible to solve otherwize:=)
And this is one of them. :)
my default is shorewall :=)
Tell us more...
I have the sim card installed in a mobile router (Huawei E5577s). It
works as any router, it gets public ipv4 address from isp as well as
the /64 ipv6 prefix which will be delegated to lan clients.
Cewl... ;-)
The public ipv4 address may change few times a day of it may stay
unchanged for a week. Also the /64 prefix changes when ipv4 address
changes.
Dynamic IPs. I could live with that for a mobile device.
Does it have port forwarding/configurable firewall for IPv6?
area... no ports have ever been blocked by my ISP /and/ i can run
servers without having to have a commercial account...
i would have writed should, there is no real point of have dynamic ips and provide servers on it
Dynamic IPs. I could live with that for a mobile device.
But hey, this _is_ a portable router with a battery. :)
Google E5577s-321 for more information.
Does it have port forwarding/configurable firewall for IPv6?
I think there's no ipv6 firewall,
but a normal ipv4 firewall / portforwarding thing yes.
It has been suggested that I use ipv6, in a nutshell are there
advantages of using, disadvantages to not using? Or is it just fun and nerdy to do so?
It has been suggested that I use ipv6, in a nutshell are there
advantages of using, disadvantages to not using? Or is it just fun and nerdy to do so?
It has been suggested that I use ipv6, in a nutshell are there
advantages of using, disadvantages to not using? Or is it just fun and nerdy to do so?
* Forwarded from area 'IPV6'
Hello Rick,
On Saturday September 11 2021 18:56, you wrote to All:
Good to see you linked up here.
It has been suggested that I use ipv6, in a nutshell are there
advantages of using, disadvantages to not using? Or is it just
fun and nerdy to do so?
Warning: I am an IPv6 evangelist. I have been promoting the use of
IPv6 in Fidonet for over a decade, so I may be a bit biased. ;-)
When your ISP already provides you with IPv6, making your Fidonet
nodes IPv6 capable is very easy. I see that you run Binkd Linux. Linux
has been supporting IPv6 for "ages" and binkd supports IPv6 from
version 1.00. All you have to do is open port 24554, or 24556 in your case, in your firewall(s) and add an AAAA record to awesome.abon.us.
So how about it?
I will contact my isp and activate my ipv6 tomorrow
and start reading on how to implement in my network.. I have unifi at
home here...
* Forwarded from area 'IPV6'
Hello Rick,
On Saturday September 11 2021 18:56, you wrote to All:
Good to see you linked up here.
Thank you... I have watched some videos and read some online journals
and I am interested enough to pursue this. I do have just a basic question, will I have ipv4 and ipv6 concurrently? Or do I have to
abandon ipv4 to utilize ipv6? That is the only thing I cant seem to
find specifics on...
Good to see you linked up here.Thank you... I have watched some videos and read some online journals
and I am interested enough to pursue this. I do have just a basic question, will I have ipv4 and ipv6 concurrently? Or do I have to
abandon ipv4 to utilize ipv6? That is the only thing I cant seem to
find specifics on...
Thank you... I have watched some videos and read some online journals
and I am interested enough to pursue this. I do have just a basic question, will I have ipv4 and ipv6 concurrently? Or do I have to
abandon ipv4 to utilize ipv6? That is the only thing I cant seem to
find specifics on...
Rick Smith wrote to All <=-
Hello All!
It has been suggested that I use ipv6, in a nutshell are there
advantages of using, disadvantages to not using? Or is it just fun and nerdy to do so?
| Sysop: | Winzlo |
|---|---|
| Location: | Minnesota, USA |
| Users: | 11 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 495928:16:49 |
| Calls: | 82 |
| Files: | 1,070 |
| Messages: | 286,841 |