"Enable IRC Ports" setting missing

[EpicKittyXD]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

[evantkh]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I don't think ISP will filter protocol 41 for business users in normal cases, but I agree that the reliability is not guaranteed.
But if it is really necessary, I think at least having a BGP tunnel is helpful in securing the address spaces in case tunnels stop services and usually the connectivity should not only comes from only one provider.

[evantkh]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

Why don't you request for a routed /64 or above prefix from the server host?

[EpicKittyXD]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

Why don't you request for a routed /64 or above prefix from the server host?

Because that would require me to have access to the server panel at all times to add rdns which i dont. This is why i wanted to have the IPv6 tunnel so that i can control the rdns externally via the dns.he.net

[evantkh]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

Why don't you request for a routed /64 or above prefix from the server host?

Because that would require me to have access to the server panel at all times to add rdns which i dont. This is why i wanted to have the IPv6 tunnel so that i can control the rdns externally via the dns.he.net

Why don't you delegate the rdns of your prefix to external dns providers in the control panel by changing ns records in your rdns zone?

[EpicKittyXD]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

Why don't you request for a routed /64 or above prefix from the server host?

Because that would require me to have access to the server panel at all times to add rdns which i dont. This is why i wanted to have the IPv6 tunnel so that i can control the rdns externally via the dns.he.net

Why don't you delegate the rdns of your prefix to external dns providers in the control panel by changing ns records in your rdns zone?

I'm trying to stick with what i already know. I've asked if DO will supply more IPv6 but currently they will only allow 1 per server. Others have recommended that i use a IPv6 tunnel system and since i've already reached Sage on this one, I'm just wanting the IRC ports to be opened so that i can use them

I'm not sure why opening the IRC ports would be such an issue and take this long. I've told everyone exactly what im wanting to do with the IPv6 stack and how i will use it. Im not wanting to abuse the system but this seams like one of the easiest ways of actually getting rdns hostmasks for everyone.

On another point, my domain name has been taken down for some reason so i dont even have a working rdns on IPv4 anymore. I just want to get this working as it seams to be dragging on too long now.

[evantkh]

If I were a business (which I am, IT services for the SMB market) I would not want production IPv6 traffic using a tunnel for that traffic. Especially if I were selling services to clients that relied on that connection.

Your connection is subject to one more company keeping things working, and since tunnels are essentially transition and demonstration technologies I expect them to go away. Plus, your regular ISP can shut them down at any time by blocking the traffic. In HE's situation blocking Protocol 41 would be sufficient. In addition there are additional complexities related to setting up and maintaining a tunnel that are not present with native IPv6 that all to often break with things such as power outages or even IP address changes if you don't have a static IPv4 address.

Of course that depend on you being able to get native IPv6 connectivity from an ISP.

That said HE's tunnelbroker is great for a business that wants to experiment with and test IPv6 before rolling it out, and for home users that don't have some of the needs (including uptime and reliability) that a business has. I use it for that for myself and my business, but unless a client has an absolute requirement for IPv6 I won't roll out a tunnel for them, I'll just wait for native IPv6 and security tools that provide the same coverage as they do in IPv4.

I guess more clearing up is required. This server is hosted on DigitalOcean by a friend who has given this server to me. Therefor i do not have access to the panel to configure any of the internal DNS stuff. I've been told that i can bindhost on IPv4 as i already have but the 1 IPv6 address supplied with it doesnt allow it. This is why i am wanting to get the tunnel working with IRC. This service may be private but it is certainly free. At the moment im not even accepting donations for it.

In the future, I am going to be setting up a donations system on the BNC but I'll never charge for something they can get free else where as it seams unethical. I just though that offering them to ability to change their hostmask before starting up the donations system would be a good idea

Why don't you request for a routed /64 or above prefix from the server host?

Because that would require me to have access to the server panel at all times to add rdns which i dont. This is why i wanted to have the IPv6 tunnel so that i can control the rdns externally via the dns.he.net

Why don't you delegate the rdns of your prefix to external dns providers in the control panel by changing ns records in your rdns zone?

I'm trying to stick with what i already know. I've asked if DO will supply more IPv6 but currently they will only allow 1 per server. Others have recommended that i use a IPv6 tunnel system and since i've already reached Sage on this one, I'm just wanting the IRC ports to be opened so that i can use them

I'm not sure why opening the IRC ports would be such an issue and take this long. I've told everyone exactly what im wanting to do with the IPv6 stack and how i will use it. Im not wanting to abuse the system but this seams like one of the easiest ways of actually getting rdns hostmasks for everyone.

On another point, my domain name has been taken down for some reason so i dont even have a working rdns on IPv4 anymore. I just want to get this working as it seams to be dragging on too long now.

I think other tunnel providers may also block IRC ports. I think you can try to use 6to4 instead or else either continue to wait for the response from he.net or register for IPv6 prefix at RIR  as you cannot request for more native IPv6 for youe server.

6to4 relay 192.88.99.1 belongs to 192.88.99.0/24 subnet which is announced by different organisations including he.net. You can try to do a traceroute to see the which organisation will be chosen for your endpoint by the routers on the internet.