Subj : I'm not at all sure...
To   : Björn Felten
From : Benny Pedersen
Date : Mon Nov 05 2012 14:05:28

Hello Björn!

04 Nov 2012 15:57, Björn Felten wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

 WvV>> -+- 2001:16d8:ff00:2f8::2 ping statistics ---
 WvV>> 2 packets transmitted, 2 received, 0% packet loss,

 BF> Thanks a lot! Not very impressive response time, but at least it 
 BF> seems to be working so far.

is it tunnel ?, if so its doubble time, and if its ipv6 and ipv4 in same cable it will olso give more ping time on both ipv4 and ipv6

 WvV>> # telnet 2001:16d8:ff00:2f8::2 80
 WvV>> Trying 2001:16d8:ff00:2f8::2...
 WvV>> telnet: connect to address 2001:16d8:ff00:2f8::2: Connection refused

 WvV>> Maybe a firewall issue?

+1

 BF> Now *that* was interesting. Trying telnet to port 80 was rather 
 BF> smart, I think.

+1

 BF> Alas, no, I don't think my old XP/SP2 firewall knows anything about 
 BF> IPv6.

you really dont need ipv6 hardware boxes as xp fix to serve ipv6 pages from it, but you need to have a router that can dnat ipv6 wan to ipv4 lan, for instance squid would solve this nicely :)

 BF> I really should put an Ubuntu install on that computer -- but 
 BF> there's still a gazillion or so DOS programs running on it. :(

apt-cache search dosbox

what problem do you think xp solves better then ubuntu ?

and when you are there install shorewall !

but then you must not have it on lan without direct wan connection

 BF> What happens if you try:
 BF> # telnet 2001:16d8:ff00:306::2

this is port 80 default on ipv6

 BF> Hmmm... That would be Argus answering that request, I guess. Nah, 
 BF> not likely to work.

if you dnat it yes


 Regards Benny

.... there can only be one way of life, and it works :)

--- Msged/LNX 6.2.0 (Linux/3.5.7-gentoo (i686))
 * Origin: duggi.junc.org where qico is waiting (1:261/38.20)

.