Hi!
Thanks a lot for you reply.
On 08.11.2016 22:56, teor wrote:
No, that's a ticket related to private IPv6 addresses on test networks.
Yes, I used the wrong URL.
You want this one, which is not fixed: https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/5940
Maybe it will be fixed or something in this direction.
Address autodetection is error-prone.
That sounds logical. Also, if you have configured IPv6 privacy extensions.
IPv4 address autodetection is the source of many accidental misconfigurations by relay operators.
Especially, if you are behind a CGN and your ISP DNS returns an private IPv4 address.
better for operators to select a routable IPv6 address.
That's the way I've configured it in the past.
It probably is best to avoid configuring IPv6, or get a better ISP.
It depends. If you only have the choice between cable or xDSL networks. I would be happy, if I could get a Gigabit connection for an affordable price to spend more bandwidth. But the EU is sometimes like an underdeveloped country. They call it: "Connecting Europe" or Digital Single Market (DAE 2020).
(There's no reason for an ISP to change prefixes for IPv6, they should have plenty of address space. Sounds like they're treating it just like IPv4.)
Hmm, I've called some technicians of the ISP, they said, that they have disabled IPv6 in some of there modems, because of issues. And it's a relative new thing. My answer was, that the RFC 2460 exists since 1998. That's a really innovation.
Regards,