[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: 6to4 usage scenarios
It should be used as Brian stated and with the intention brian stated.
This is a gigantic rathole with no need to be here.
/jim
[Honor, Commitment, Integrity]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pekka Savola [mailto:pekkas@netcore.fi]
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 9:14 PM
> To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: 6to4 usage scenarios
>
>
> Hello,
>
> It seems like the 6to4 security discussion degenerated into
> argument on
> how it was meant to be used.
>
> There are two basic models of connecting 6to4 routers to relays:
>
> 1) simple static route to your relay
> 2) BGP sessions to your relay and all the other relays where
> you want to
> receive native IPv6 packets from
>
> I know of _no_ deployments of 2) even though Brian insists on
> that being the only "real" 6to4 usage scenario. Does anyone
> know this being used?
>
> If not, I think we must acknowledge that 2) is not really
> right-tool-for-the-job (think of 6over4 **), and that 1) is
> the primary
> (only?) applicability target of 6to4.
>
> The alternative is that we have gaping holes in Home/SOHO and
> partially
> maybe enterprise transition scenarios, and nothing to fill
> them at the
> moment.
>
> **) 6over4 is a nice technique, and we could even use it --
> but we don't
> want stuff like that. The same IMO applies to 6to4+BGP.
> There is no use
> specifying mechanisms for the audience who does not want them.
>
> P.S. I only came to the wg after 6to4 had just gone RFC, this
> internal bickering really took me off surprise and made me
> both frustrated and angry about refusing to accept the reality.
>
> --
> Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
> Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
>
>
>
>
>
>