 
nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 10:00:16 +0200
I've many customers using MikroTik.
The problem with its IPv6 support is that is only supporting 6in4, which by the way, they call it 6to4, so it is very 
weird and confusing customers ...
So for native IPv6 or a 6in4 tunnel, is fine, but any other transition mechanism is NOT supported, so we end up 
reflashing then with OpenWRT.
Regards,
Jordi
 
 
-----Mensaje original-----
De: NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> en nombre de Mark Tinka <mark.tinka () seacom mu>
Fecha: viernes, 22 de junio de 2018, 9:07
Para: Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>, Job Snijders <job () instituut net>
CC: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog () nanog org>
Asunto: Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap
    
    
    On 20/Jun/18 05:48, Jared Mauch wrote:
    
    > MikroTik is getting there but most people are just not enabling it either.
    
    I have a MikroTik hAP Lite router for my FTTH service at my house.
    
    It has excellent support for IPv6, including a ton of translation
    mechanisms.
    
    My problem is my home provider doesn't do IPv6, so I run a 6-in-4 tunnel
    back to my own backbone for the service (no latency impact as my home
    provider is my IP Transit customer :-) ). This is a little unstable
    because my home provider doesn't know how to give me a stable IPv4
    address for my FTTH service.
    
    But I do have to say that I am massively impressed by what that little
    MikroTik box can do. IPv6 on my home LAN works as expected, as it does
    across the 6-in-4 tunnel.
    
    Mark.
    
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be 
for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, 
distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly 
prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached 
files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to 
inform about this communication and delete it.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Ca By (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Job Snijders (Jun 11)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Seth Mattinen (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jeremy Austin (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 19)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mike Hammett (Jun 23)
 
 
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 22)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Jared Mauch (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Randy Bush (Jun 23)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Mark Tinka (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Randy Bush (Jun 25)
- Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap Ben Cannon (Jun 25)
 


