Am Monday 06 June 2011 schrieb mir Jeroen Massar:
On 2011-Jun-06 15:55, Oliver Schad wrote:
Am Monday 06 June 2011 schrieb mir Jeroen Massar:
The only thing where it might not be compatible is the user interface for making it easy to configure them.
While I agree to your point of view that 6rd and 6to4 are very close to each other and it shoudln't take much time to implement all necessary changes in user land and kernel it is still not compatible because you have to set the prefix.
So if you look for a CPE or whatever which supports 6to4 you can't conclude that it supports 6rd. That is what I mean. Remember, the OP was looking for boxes which supports 6rd and in this context he asked for 6to4.
And the answer is no, it isn't true, that support for 6to4 means support for 6rd.
I did not state that, I did state that if you can configure a static protocol-41 tunnel, you can also configure a 6to4 and a 6rd one, just that you will have to do the prefix calculation yourself and not the easy way in the UI.
Yes that's true.
But you can implement 6to4 without the possibility to support 6rd. The implementation can be compatible but it's not a must.
So maybe we have to different point of views what the term compatible means.
Regards Oli