Hi,
On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 06:23:34PM -0500, Alain Durand wrote:
> On 2/1/08 4:56 PM, "Gert Doering" <gert@space.net> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 03:46:22PM -0500, Alain Durand wrote:
> >> Essentially, expecting to get a functioning 6to4 relay is expecting a free
> >> lunch. Who is going to pay for it?
> >
> > If enough ISPs provide working 6to4 relays, serving their own customers
> > (that pay for the bandwidth, be it IPv4 or IPv4-encapsulated IPv6), the
> > model would work just fine.
>
> Why should ISP X pay to run a 6to4 relay that would in essence offer transit
> for customers of other ISPs?
Why should it, indeed. If he does not want to do that, nobody forces
him to announce the IPv4 anycast address / 2002::/16 to this other ISP.
> And let's say that ISP X offer the outband
> relay for its customers only, how would the packets come back from the real
> IPv6 Internet to ISP X IPv4 network? Is ISP X suppose to announce a
> de-aggregate of 2002://16? That would create a huge increase in the routing
> table size...
The response is likely to take a different path - independent of "anycast"
or not. So the response is likely to take a relay that's run by the
ISP (or upstream ISP) of the other end.
If there are enough relays, those are well-maintained and monitored,
and people stop playing political bullshit games, 6to4 could work nicely.
I do have some doubts about the "bullshit" part :(
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 110584
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Attachment:
pgpu0GkyE3xvu.pgp
Description: PGP signature