Re: Re-prioritizing 6to4 over v4 addresses

[Bernhard Schmidt <berni@birkenwald.de>]

Marcus C. Gottwald <mcg@cheers.de> wrote:

> I tried uncommenting all the "label" lines and reordering the
> "values" to ensure that "2002::/16" got a higher value than
> "::ffff:0:0/96"; and I tried uncommenting all the "precedence"
> lines and reordering the "values" (but "2002::/16" already had
> a higher value than "::ffff:0:0/96" anyway); but both changes
> did not show an effect, neither after an application restart nor
> after a reboot.

I think the best way is just to use the default configuration, then drop
the 2002::/16 block completely. 

Bernhard