Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    IPV6    |    The convoluted hot-mess that is IPV6    |    4,612 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,568 of 4,612    |
|    Victor Sudakov to Alexey Vissarionov    |
|    Two ISPs and backup for a home network (    |
|    29 Jun 21 21:43:24    |
      REPLY: 2:5020/545 60da34cd       MSGID: 2:5005/49 60db3242       CHRS: CP866 2       TZUTC: 0700       TID: hpt/fbsd 1.9.0-cur 2019-12-05       Dear Alexey,              28 Jun 21 23:45, you wrote to me:               VS>> What if I had two IPv6-capable ISPs for my home, and a /64 or a        VS>> /56 from each of them? Is it possible to setup a backup link this        VS>> way?               AV> Yes.               VS>> I know that my home router can advertise multiple global IPv6        VS>> prefixes into the LAN, but how will LAN hosts failover to the        VS>> backup gateway if the primary ISP fails? They will have IPv6        VS>> addresses from both blocks, which should they choose for their        VS>> outgoing src address?               AV> This is the preferred mode of operation, but it has (only) two        AV> disadvantages: 1. All hosts in the LAN must be able to do the        AV> switching|balancing on thy own (that means, run Linux; the BSD-style        AV> networking stack, like the one used in Windoze, has very limited        AV> functionality). 2. This may require some manual configuration on every        AV> of them. Not really a problem, but may be boring.              This is not feasible because most of those LAN hosts are smartphones, smart       TVs, vacuum cleaners, cameras and other IoT devices.               VS>> With two IPv4 ISPs and NAT, the setup is rather trivial, outgoing        VS>> connections will work via either of the ISPs because the hosts        VS>> needn't be aware of the failure, and their src private IP is        VS>> always the same. Can anyone enlighten me?               AV> This is second option, but you'd lose the main advantage of IPv6: the        AV> use of publicly routed addresses.              Indeed. I don't like the idea of using NAT in IPv6 even if I could. So what's       the solution?              Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN       --- GoldED+/BSD 1.1.5-b20170303-b20170303        * Origin: Ulthar (2:5005/49)       SEEN-BY: 1/123 30/0 50/109 80/1 90/1 105/81 120/340 123/131 154/10       SEEN-BY: 221/1 6 226/30 227/702 229/424 426 550 700 1016 240/1120       SEEN-BY: 240/5832 249/206 317 400 261/38 280/464 5555 282/464 1038       SEEN-BY: 301/0 1 101 113 812 317/3 322/757 342/200 460/58 463/68 467/239       SEEN-BY: 467/888 633/280 712/848 920/1 5000/111 5001/100 5005/49 53       SEEN-BY: 5015/46 5020/715 830 846 1042 2047 2140 4441 5053/54 5058/104       SEEN-BY: 5064/56 5083/1 444       PATH: 5005/49 5020/1042 301/1 229/426           |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca