btw: this is all set up manually for ppp3, which is a dynamic number, which is the original feature request :-)<br><br>Hrm, I had enabled UnicastOnly, which disabled unsolicited advertisements. If I disable UnicastOnly, then the RA's are sent and Vista configures the extra IP's. With 1.1 it complains that I should be using UnicastOnly because the interface can't broadcast, but if I enable it, then the RA's are not sent.<br>
<br>This says that Vista expects unsolicited RA's over it's ppp link: <a href="http://blogs.technet.com/rrasblog/archive/2006/12/15/vista-how-pppv6-support-works.aspx">http://blogs.technet.com/rrasblog/archive/2006/12/15/vista-how-pppv6-support-works.aspx</a><br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Feb 11, 2008 2:08 PM, Pekka Savola <<a href="mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi">pekkas@netcore.fi</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Are you sure? Your client could be a laptop which has a PDA or mobile<br>phone behind it, as well.</blockquote><div><br>At the moment it's just me and my laptop, and I want to be able to access my IPv6 network via my VPN connection. Vista will send a DHCPv6 packet to get a /64 prefix if-and-only-if ICS (connection sharing) is enabled. I'm not supporting that scenario yet. <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">> pppd is setting up the fe80::prefi, but not my global prefix. I did a quick<br>
> test, and even if I do announce the prefix down the ppp link, my vista<br>> clients are not using it. Any ideas?<br></div><br>Which prefix did you try to advertise? The RFCs and implementations<br>require that you advertise a /64, otherwise it's ignored from the<br>
address configuration perspective. If you advertised a /64, I don't<br>know why Vista would have ignored it. If you advertised something<br>else, that's the reason.</blockquote><div><br>I was advertising fe80::/64 and 2001:618:400:6f39::/64. radvd wasn't transmitting the RA unless I disabled UnicastOnly, then the new 1.1 version complains when I enabled it, and the interface doesn't support broadcast. I need a unsolicited unicast option :-)<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">It seems that what you intend to do is not compatible with IPv6<br>addressing mechanisms. My suggestion is that you advertise a<br>
different /64 on each link (for which you don't need the interface<br>address feature) or you use a different mechanism for assigning<br>addresses on the clients (for example, IKEv2 supports IPv6 address<br>configuration payloads) where you don't need to assign or advertise a<br>
global IPv6 prefix on the links in the first place.<font color="#888888"><br></font></blockquote></div><br>Unfortunately I'm trying to interoperate with magic software produced by Microsoft, so there's not much I can do.<br clear="all">
<br>-- <br>- Norman Rasmussen<br> - Email: <a href="mailto:norman@rasmussen.co.za">norman@rasmussen.co.za</a><br> - Home page: <a href="http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/">http://norman.rasmussen.co.za/</a>