search for: msg00437

...t worry at all > about accept_ra -- 0 is fine if it was set e.g. by NetworkManager. > Otherwise, just go ahead and set it to 2, we're not conflicting with > anything that would set addresses from RAs (other than the kernel). In https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2020-August/msg00437.html I proposed only checking the interfaces if they're set to "1" already. I think that will mean we leave userspace configured addresses alone? > Yes, that would be ideal. I don't think NAT with IPv6 is a wise thing > to do, but my ISP just delegates a /64 prefix to me....

Hi, Sorry for the delay. On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 23:52:46 -0400 Laine Stump <laine@redhat.com> wrote: > On 8/10/20 11:23 PM, Ian Wienand wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Firstly THANK YOU for the IPv6 NAT support merged in 6.5. It has been > > almost impossible to get IPv6 into a VM on a laptop that switches > > between wifi and wired (dock) connections, because

Hello, Firstly THANK YOU for the IPv6 NAT support merged in 6.5. It has been almost impossible to get IPv6 into a VM on a laptop that switches between wifi and wired (dock) connections, because you can not add a wifi interface to a bridge. I know NAT is against the IPv6 end-to-end xen but it makes this "just work" for the vast majority of people like me who need to ssh/curl/talk to