Yeah, that's part of why it isn't feasible :) Also - a more generalized black-hole detection type mechanism (to also catch PMTUD failures, etc) would be mighty useful ... /TJ ------Original Message------ From: Nathan Ward To: nanog list Subject: Re: IPv6 routing /48s Sent: Nov 19, 2008 15:34 On 20/11/2008, at 10:11 AM, trejrco@gmail.com wrote:

Ah yes, public-but-not-external IPv4 addresses ... I wish a stern note saying don't do that was feasible ...

What people do with their addresses is their business. The problem here is XPSP2/Vista assuming that non-RFC1918 = unfiltered/ unNATed for the purposes of 6to4. Well, deeper problem is that they're using 6to4 on an end host I suppose - it's supposed to be used on routers. I was going to write up a qualification mechanism for it so it could detect if 6to4 was OK or not, but code is already out there on umpteen million PCs that aren't going to do their patches. I still plan to.. hopefully I'll get around to it when I feel a bit less jaded :-) -- Nathan Ward Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry