RE: An alternative to 6to4 and teredo

[Marc Blanchet <Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca>]

-- vendredi, janvier 17, 2003 21:04:08 +0100 Jeroen Massar
<jeroen@unfix.org> wrote/a écrit:

> Pekka Savola wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Erik Nordmark wrote:
> 
> <LONG SNIP>
> 
>> That's not all.  6to4/Teredo offer an automatic configuration using 
>> anycast addresses.  Much easier than trying to figure out the closest 
>> tunnel broker, configuring to use that etc.
>>  
>> > The upsides for tunnel broker (with UDP tunneling across 
>> NATs, or even PPP
>> > over  TCP over NATs for those so inclined) in addition to 
>> the incentives above
>> > is that it avoids the security issues around 6to4 and Teredo, and is
>> > operationally much much simpler to trouble-shoot.
>> 
>> I agree, but there is a cost to a tunnel broker model, that 
>> is, not so simple configuration..
> 
> There is at least Tunnel Setup Protocol (TSP*) which does automatic
> configuration and it'salso quite extendable. On debian for instance
> it's "apt-get install freenet6" and you are going. The only 'problem'
> is that the Freenet6 broker system is located in the US thus european
> hosts have some (80ms+) additional latency. A "POP" per ISP would be
> better which is something we are pursuing for SixXS. The TSP protocol
> can handle this fortunatly. A POP per ISP would at least mean that
> clients can get near-native IPv6.
> 
> TSP: http://www.freenet6.net/draft-tsp.shtml
> It is marked "Expires: November 30, 2001" though, what happened
> that it didn't get pushed through?

we have made updates on the draft (but forgot to update the freenet6
website).
please refer to: draft-blanchet-ngtrans-tsp-*

Marc.