RE: 6to4 relays [Re: WG Review: IPv6 Operations (v6ops)]

["Bound, Jim" <Jim.Bound@hp.com>]

6to4 assumes a NAT is not in the way of the relay.  Teredo addresses the case where there is a NAT in the way.  And why I think Teredo is very important to work on from v6 operations perspective.  I have NAT in my home (I know I know) and can see Teredo or daughter of Teredo (that not being defined) helping me in my home.  6to4 won't work my ISP don't have the address space to give each of us the v4 addr space.  DSTM has the same problem and ISATAP would only have private address to help me out.  Teredo gives me some chance without completely blowing my network away.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy@psg.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2002 7:00 AM
> To: Francis Dupont
> Cc: Brian E Carpenter; Pekka Savola; v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: 6to4 relays [Re: WG Review: IPv6 Operations (v6ops)] 
> 
> 
> >> We are still missing an RFC really analysing host-based 6to4,
> >> and until that work has been done we don't know what is bogus.
> > a new work item for the v6ops WG?
> 
> how is this different from what shipworm is trying to solve?
> 
> randy
> 
> 
>