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

Re: unmanaged solutions comments



At 23:33 +0300 9/19/02, Pekka Savola wrote:
I'd perhaps reword that as "no global tunneled infrastructure".  And even
then I'd be a bit hesistant: tunneling across short distances is not that
big a deal, but adding different administrative parties can make it more
and more difficult.

Solutions like ISATAP can provide rather good performance in a limited
case;  connections outside of the "site" could be native v6.
That's a good point. I'm thinking of the global IPv6 infrastructure and individual hosts or sites connecting to it. And I suspect that any solution for this case that uses tunnels, automatic or manual, is likely to face the problem of sub-optimal forward and/or reverse paths that you mentioned originally. In other words 6to4 is neither better nor worse, just different.

As long as the density of tunnels is much less than the density of the connections in the underlying network, the path taken by the tunneled traffic between two points will be likely to be worse than the path taken by native traffic. And the well-known scaling problems of tunnels (including crossing administrative domains) makes it unlikely that they will become very dense without suffering maintainability problems.

Since there are relatively few 6to4 relay routers out there, performance is often poor for 6to4 to native traffic. But the same is often true for tunnel brokers, and sometimes for manual tunnels. And at least 6to4 has good performance to other 6to4 sites.

Bill.