= Сообщение: 6111 из 7402 ============================================= IPV6 = От : Jeff Smith 1:282/1031 02 Aug 19 11:07:02 Кому : Michiel Van Der Vlist 02 Aug 19 11:07:02 Тема : IP6 Tunnel? FGHI : area://IPV6?msgid=1:282/1031.0+b64fafe5 На : area://IPV6?msgid=2:280/5555+5d441d1d = Кодировка сообщения определена как: ASCII ================================== Ответ: area://IPV6?msgid=2:280/5555+5d4949b8 ============================================================================== Hello Michiel,
>The tunnel does not "support" a static IPv4 endpoint. It is more the other way >around. A tunnel needs a public IPv4 address for its end point. The same publi > IPv4 address can be used for other purposes, such as a Fidonet Binkp server. >But it need not be. The fact that the tunnel is used to supply an IPv6 address >to the same binkd server is irrelevant. The binkp server can be on a different > IPv4 address than the tunnel servicing the IPOv6 part.
>Yes, for a second tunnel, you need a different public IPv4 address for the end > point.
>My point is: you probably do not need a second tunnel. A tunnel is a channel t > the rest of the world that can handle many IPv6 addresses. Just like an IPv4 > router can make you connect many device to the IPv4 internet via a single > channel, so can a tunnel for IPv6.
> You can assign different IPv6 addresses to 1:282/1031 and 1:14/6 over one and > the same tunnel. > How this is done and if it is "better" in your situation is another matter.
I am learning as I go here. :-) Now... If my line of reasoning is reasonable I could setup a tunnel to a reflashed router with a public IP which would then service the IP's in use here. I have a router provided by my service provider that I am better off not messing with. I think I might have an older LinkSys router that I could use for testing different ideas. I may not be totally on the mark with my thinking "Yet" but I am working on it. :-)
