Hurricane Electric's IPv6 Tunnel Broker Forums

Advanced search  

News:

Welcome to Hurricane Electric's Tunnelbroker.net forums!

Author Topic: Unable to Install IPv6 Tunnel By Netsh Commands  (Read 1813 times)

RDWells

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Unable to Install IPv6 Tunnel By Netsh Commands
« on: August 02, 2015, 04:03:02 PM »

Hi all,

Running Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

Given the suggestions of using these netsh commands to install an IPv6 tunnel:

netsh interface teredo set state disabled
netsh interface ipv6 add v6v4tunnel interface=IP6Tunnel 207.181.229.138 184.105.253.14
netsh interface ipv6 add address IP6Tunnel 2001:470:1f10:111f::2
netsh interface ipv6 add route ::/0 IP6Tunnel 2001:470:1f10:111f::1

I get this result:

C:\>netsh interface teredo set state disabled
Ok.

C:\>netsh interface ipv6 add v6v4tunnel interface=IP6Tunnel 207.181.229.138 184.105.253.14
The function attempted to use a name that is reserved for use by another transaction.
(I've used other names for the string but with the same result.)

C:\>netsh interface ipv6 add address IP6Tunnel 2001:470:1f10:111f::2
The filename, directory name, or volume label syntax is incorrect.
(Which baffles me since this is the suggested syntax for this command.)

C:\>netsh interface ipv6 add route ::/0 IP6Tunnel 2001:470:1f10:111f::1
The filename, directory name, or volume label syntax is incorrect.
(Ditto here.)

By all appearances the syntax is correct but I cannot reach a solution to get past the first error, let alone the correct syntax for the third and fourth lines.

Very frustrating, to say the least.  Any ideas, folks?
Logged

broquea

  • Sr. Network Engineer, HE.NET AS6939
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
Re: Unable to Install IPv6 Tunnel By Netsh Commands
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2015, 07:34:05 PM »

well...there is this entire thread: https://forums.he.net/index.php?topic=3429.0
Logged

RDWells

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Unable to Install IPv6 Tunnel By Netsh Commands
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2015, 06:56:41 PM »

Which unfortunately I did not see but did not yield any concrete results anyway, only more of the same brokenness.

Thanks all the same for the link.
Logged