Changes in 6de5efc: Updated Frequently-Asked-Questions (markdown)

Frequently-Asked-Questions.md

@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@ The DN42 registry is stored on multiple monotone servers which sync with each ot

 There are some ASes in DN42 that route IPv6 traffic. It is not yet agreed upon what prefixes should be used. The following proposals are the more sane ones:

-* Use Unique Local Addresses (ULAs). This is the *fd00::/8* range. In theory, this would be the obvious winner of this debate. They were standardised for exactly this purpose (not publicly routed networks that still want to use unique prefixes). Sadly, this would require you to announce two prefixes in your LAN if you want to use stateless autoconfiguration and no NAT: The ULA and a globally routed prefix. It is not yet known if this really works. [RFC 3484](http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3484.txt) demands a behavior that would make this work at the moment (until globally routed addresses from 8000::/1 are used)

+* Use Unique Local Addresses (ULAs). This is the *fd00::/8* range. In theory, this would be the obvious winner of this debate. They were standardised for exactly this purpose (not publicly routed networks that still want to use unique prefixes). Sadly, this would require you to announce two prefixes in your LAN if you want to use stateless autoconfiguration and no NAT: The ULA and a globally routed prefix. It is not yet known if this really works. [RFC 3484](http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3484.txt) demands a behavior that would make this work at the moment (until globally routed addresses from 8000::/1 are used).

+[This](http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula) generator can be used to generate a ULA prefix from one of your MAC addresses.

 * Use your globally unique PA space. This fixes the LAN-issue, because you only need to announce a single prefix. However, this complicates prefix filtering for everybody, and can lead to strange routing patterns, where packets are routed partially on dn42 and partially through the Internet.

 (*TODO*)

...	...	@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@ The DN42 registry is stored on multiple monotone servers which sync with each ot
11	11
12	12	There are some ASes in DN42 that route IPv6 traffic. It is not yet agreed upon what prefixes should be used. The following proposals are the more sane ones:
13	13
14		-* Use Unique Local Addresses (ULAs). This is the fd00::/8 range. In theory, this would be the obvious winner of this debate. They were standardised for exactly this purpose (not publicly routed networks that still want to use unique prefixes). Sadly, this would require you to announce two prefixes in your LAN if you want to use stateless autoconfiguration and no NAT: The ULA and a globally routed prefix. It is not yet known if this really works. [RFC 3484](http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3484.txt) demands a behavior that would make this work at the moment (until globally routed addresses from 8000::/1 are used)
	14	+* Use Unique Local Addresses (ULAs). This is the fd00::/8 range. In theory, this would be the obvious winner of this debate. They were standardised for exactly this purpose (not publicly routed networks that still want to use unique prefixes). Sadly, this would require you to announce two prefixes in your LAN if you want to use stateless autoconfiguration and no NAT: The ULA and a globally routed prefix. It is not yet known if this really works. [RFC 3484](http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3484.txt) demands a behavior that would make this work at the moment (until globally routed addresses from 8000::/1 are used).
	15	+[This](http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula) generator can be used to generate a ULA prefix from one of your MAC addresses.
15	16	* Use your globally unique PA space. This fixes the LAN-issue, because you only need to announce a single prefix. However, this complicates prefix filtering for everybody, and can lead to strange routing patterns, where packets are routed partially on dn42 and partially through the Internet.
16	17
17	18	(TODO)