[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[6bone] In the summer time, we got cleaning to do... Where is UUNET?

>> Michel Py wrote:
>> Because by announcing 2002::/16 on the 6bone, we create another form
>> anycast. Not only there already is an anycast mechanism, it is very
>> seldom used. I do not see any reason to re-create another one.
>> Let's make seq 30 optional.

> Pekka Savola wrote:
> By that you'd implicitly require that every pTLA who wants
> to communicate with 6to4 nodes must also have a 6to4 relay.

I think that a good thing. There are no pTLAs that have no v4
connectivity, are there? I would go even further than this: why should
we see 6to4 traffic crossing tunnels half of the world, finally reach an
anycast 6to4 relay somewhere and travel another distance to reach their
v4 target?

I think each site that has ipv4 connectivity should have their own 6to4
relay. It would be much better to have a 6to4 relay close to the source.
I was hoping that by making the 2002::/16 route optional, it would force
people to have their own 6to4 relay. It does not take much:

interface Tunnel6
 description for ipv6 6to4 tunnels
 no ip address
 no ip redirects
 ipv6 address 2002:D1E9:7E41::1/64
 ipv6 traffic-filter IPV6-ACL-OUTSIDE-IN in
 tunnel source BVI35
 tunnel mode ipv6ip 6to4
 tunnel path-mtu-discovery
ipv6 route 2002::/16 Tunnel6