nanog mailing list archives
Re: Ipv6 for the content provider
From: Blake Hudson <blake () ispn net>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 11:53:22 -0600
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Ipv6 for the content provider From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault () viagenie ca> To: nanog () nanog org Date: Monday, January 31, 2011 11:48:34 AM
On 2011-01-31 12:38, Blake Hudson wrote:I was under the impression that the later versions of 5 (e.g. 5.5, 5.6) had backported stateful connection tracking. Has anyone tested recently?The command # ip6tables -A INPUT -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT works on CentOS 5.5. And there's no documentation for it in "man ip6tables". So it fits the backport hypothesis... Simon
I guess the next question is whether or not it actually works correctly....
Current thread:
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider, (continued)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Antonio Querubin (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Jared Mauch (Jan 27)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Randy McAnally (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Dale W. Carder (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Charles N Wyble (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Randy McAnally (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Lamar Owen (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Valdis . Kletnieks (Jan 26)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Blake Hudson (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Simon Perreault (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Blake Hudson (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Randy McAnally (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Lamar Owen (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Jack Bates (Jan 31)
- Re: Ipv6 for the content provider Antonio Querubin (Jan 31)