Sorry for not getting back to testing this sooner, but yes that does now work. Thanks for what ever you did to fix it.

I had a tunnel connected (on another account) to the 72.52.104.74 server and at some point today I could ping the IPv4 address but could no longer ping the IPv6 address any more.
After I deleted and added a new tunnel I could ping the other end of the tunnel but when doing traceroutes or pings or ... no packets seemed to go past the other end of the tunnel.
Just for giggles I added a tunnel to the Dallas server and everything is working fine with no changes to my end except for the tunnel details, so I'm assuming any problem(s) aren't at my end.

Do you guys have any plans to support 6to4 routing and announcing the 192.88.99.0/24 any cast space?

PIR doesn't support IPv6 glue.

Which I find comical in an ironic twist since on their website they list 2 people, almost in a boastful way, involved with national IPv6 deployment in 2 different countries. When I emailed them I got back the most boring form reply, I half felt like tracking down email addresses and emailing the 2 people listed on their website to find out what they think about PIR's stance on IPv6.

In my opinion, NO ISP should be blocking ICMP packets as they are necessary to signal certain error conditions.

Not only that but ICMP is needed for packet fragmentation to work properly, without this bad things happen and some people name and shame such companies for having poorly configured routers and/or firewalls.

It always amazes me how fast our users catch me

You had other expectations of early adopters?

[first]

No.  The first query will be IPv4, but once the AAAA record gets cached, it may be used.

Only if there is no AAAA glue records

Regardless, the root DNS servers won't have your NS records either.  Maybe you meant the TLD servers.

Isn't that kinda the same thing in the case of .com and .net domains?
I didn't see, or I over looked what domain the OP was talking about so it depends on that as to who would store any glue records.

For the more paranoid not wanting to expose your MAC address and being uniquely identified worst then cookies do I suggest not using autoconf, although you still use radvd for configuring the default routing. I tried dhcpv6, but I couldn't work out how to limit how long an address was valid before jumping to another at next boot or ....

Below is my radvd config:

Code:

interface eth0 {
        AdvSendAdvert on;
        MinRtrAdvInterval 3;
        MaxRtrAdvInterval 10;
};

From there you just need a script to add/remove IPs on each machine, I used PHP but I'm guessing a bash script wouldn't be too hard:

Code:

#!/usr/bin/php -q
<?
$iface = 'eth0';
$ip = $subnet = '2001:xxxx:yyyy:zzzz';
for($i = 0; $i <= 3; $i++)
$ip .= ':'.sprintf('%x', rand(1, 65536));
$do = trim(`ifconfig $iface|grep $subnet`);
if($do != '')
{
list($crud, $crud, $oldip, $crud) = explode(' ', $do, 4);
$del = "/sbin/ip -6 addr del $oldip dev $iface";
echo $del."\n";
$do = `$del`;
}
$add = "/sbin/ip -6 addr add $ip/64 dev $iface";
echo $add."\n";
$do = `$add`;

I haven't watched yet, but it's good of you to do this for people, you might want to link this on the main website.

Also the server is sending out the mime/type as text/html and you might want to change this to something else

The only tunnels that might still have IRC blocked would be on either tserv1 or 2. tserv3 and higher are the newer platform tunnel-servers and not blocking IRC........at the moment.

I was sure I tried to connect to freenode on 6667 and it failed, but it just worked then, must have been their end or something transient, thanks for the correction.

No plans for Australia yet, since we don't have a POP there Perhaps once we have one there as part of HE.NET's backbone, then we could provide a tunnel-server.

Fair enough, let me know if anything is planned, although I'm sure it'd be announced anyways

Not on the newer tunnel servers that we started deploying last fall. We are taking steps with specific accounts that are reported for ANY type of abuse. If we see a steady rise of IRC related abuse, then the global ban goes back up.

I didn't mean to imply you wouldn't take reports of abuse, I was just under the impression that you just blocked all IRC ports to prevent IRC abuse.

Is it possible to get IRC ports unblocked on other tunnels end points?
Is there any plans to setup an end point in Australia at all?
AARNET were running a broker but that seems to be broken for anything more then a /128 and all emails are going unanswered.

OP:  This sounds as if it's a problem with your specific configuration.  My system reports a default mtu of 1480 as expected where the real interface is 1500.  I don't see how you're getting a default of 1280.  Please explain your hardware configuration.  Something is different.

I just checked mine too, and I'm seeing the MTU automatically being set at 1480 as well.

www/dns/icecast/ircd servers with v4/v6 access.

Ummm I thought IRC ports were blocked to prevent abuse?

I volunteer my time in supporting www.e164.org and one of our name servers in the UK has native IPv6 space, but the rest of our name servers like those in the US don't have IPv6 space and I've enabled both US servers with tunnels. In the last few days I've also added AAAA records for all the websites on one of the US boxes, and I'm going to be redoing our DNS records shortly to have IPv6 glue records as well, currently only the UK IP has been added as a glue record.

We're keeping track of the DNS requests coming in via IPv6 connections and it's pretty low at this stage, although not having the IPs as glue records is partly responsible I'm guessing.

I still have to shift mail + mailing lists to the same box at some point, and that would also be IPv6 enabled then as well, but I've been going to shift mail to that system for a few years now and just haven't gotten round to it

Yes, it was a generic question without regard to a specific TLD.  Sixxs.org has a page on their site indicating which domain registrars support IPv6 glue - very few do.  I have a .org, a .info, and a .name, so it's possible that the answer addressed that, but only if they looked my account up before answering.

I don't have a .org with godaddy, but I initially emailed my registrar who said PIR didn't support it, so I than emailed PIR in the last month or so and they showed a complete lack of interest in allowing IPv6 glue records at all, so godaddy can hardly be blamed for that TLD in particular.

PIR is the registry for .org who boast about having board members involved with IPv6 deployment on their website etc, I half considered emailing those board members directly about the response I received.

As far as I'm aware .com, .net, .biz, .au all allow IPv6 glue records, although the .au registry never bothered to tell anyone not even their registrars when they enabled it which I thought a tad strange but anyways.