Quote from: stanthewizzard on August 30, 2024, 12:33:39 pmI listenedEverything is 2a01:cb00:c53:c5d6::xxxx (and some wiht fixed IP)I can ping fd07:1972:2406:2014::4 from any host (after a windows server reboot it was ok)Everything is now okTHANKS !!! may i recommend reading into: https://blogs.infoblox.com/ipv6-coe/ula-is-broken-in-dual-stack-networks/(sorry if links are not allowed, please search in your favorite search engine for ipv6 ula is broken)
I listenedEverything is 2a01:cb00:c53:c5d6::xxxx (and some wiht fixed IP)I can ping fd07:1972:2406:2014::4 from any host (after a windows server reboot it was ok)Everything is now okTHANKS !!!
Quote from: CruxtheNinth on August 30, 2024, 12:51:14 pmmay i recommend reading into: https://blogs.infoblox.com/ipv6-coe/ula-is-broken-in-dual-stack-networks/I already linked to that indirectly, and expanded on that with a later post offering a practical demo.So yes, IOW - overall this is a nice exercise in getting dual-stack working that will not be used anyway.
may i recommend reading into: https://blogs.infoblox.com/ipv6-coe/ula-is-broken-in-dual-stack-networks/
Must be the idea of "private addresses" from IPv4 experience that misleads people to try to use ULA.
Quote from: Patrick M. Hausen on August 30, 2024, 02:07:34 pmMust be the idea of "private addresses" from IPv4 experience that misleads people to try to use ULA.Probably, plus the stupid ISPs and changing prefixes. Making ULA less preferred than IPv4 in the stack somehow improved things here, at least using ULA does not break IPv4 on the way - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5220#section-2.2.2