NAT66 and 2nd interface IPv6 IP option for ULA [SOLVED]
-
Interesting ok, well back to the original point, we need NAT66 lol.
-
@Zermus said in NAT66 support is needed and 2nd interface IPv6 IP option for ULA would be nice:
we need NAT66 lol.
I think pfSense already does that. But who is we?
-
If I understand it correctly you can't use NPt because the translation prefix conflicts with the assigned prefix on the WAN?
-
Yes sir, NPt is no joy.
-
You can just add a 1:1 NAT rule between the VIP and the ULA address. I tested that here and it works as expected.
-
Oh excellent I didn't realize that covered NAT66!
-
Checks out! I'm up and working with NAT66.
I feel so dirty..... Already doing NAT66 on IPv6 lol....
-
Ha, yup. NATing IPv6.... yikes!
-
@Zermus said in NAT66 and 2nd interface IPv6 IP option for ULA [SOLVED]:
You do it with Virtual IP?
I have both global and unique local addresses on my LAN.
-
@JKnott Well aren't you special? Some of us are not as privileged who want to run our servers behind a pfSense frontend over at Vultr lol.
