Re: I-D Action:draft-vandevelde-v6ops-harmful-tunnels-01.txt

[Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>]

Hi, Brian,

 > But that resolves to 192.88.99.1 which *is* the anycast address
[RFC3068],
> at least where I'm sitting.

Yes. Now I wonder... a few days ago I was snooping my own traffic, and
my 6to4 packets were *not* being directed to 192.88.99.1. :-/  -- for
instance, I was rather surprised about that.


> If you know the right magic, you can make Windows (XP, at any rate) use
> whatever outbound relay you want, but it's still host-based 6to4, and
> the RFC 3056 model is router based.

One could expect a vendor to, e.g., populate a domain like
6to4.ipv6.dlink.com that contains several A records, and have their
equipment resolve that domain, find the closest domain, and use that one
rather than the anycast domain.

FWIW, what I don't like about the 6to4 anycast addr is that 6to4 relays
respond to queries (e.g. ping) with the anycast address as the source
address, rather than the unicast one. -- Yes, this was suggested in some
RFC (6to4 security?)

Thanks,
-- 
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1