Re: Automatic tunnels

[Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>]

Christian Huitema wrote:

> > IPv6
> > destination, but won't do much to make sure that the same packets will
> > return any quicker. As 6to4 to native and back is fundamentally
> > asymmetric routing,
> > somebody, preferably close to the native IPv6 node has to have a route
> > for 2002::/16.
> >    
> Deploying a "native to 6to4" relay is actually very easy -- its is a
> matter of turning on 6to4 relaying on a dual-stack router, or even on a
> dual-stack host. I would expect that these relays will be plentiful.
>  
Do you have any data that shows that this is happening?

> > As one can not realistically expect to have every single IPv6 network
> > maintaining
> > a local native-to-6to4 gateway, we would have to rely on public,
> > open native-to-6to4 relays to exist and advertise 2002::/16 in the
> >    
> DFZ.
>
> We should precisely aim for having at least one native to 6to4 router in
> every dual stack ISP. These routers are very easy to control: just don't
> propagate 2002::/16 in BGP. They provide an immediate added value to the
> local IPv6 users.
So, if I understand you correctly, what you're aiming at is that
everytime a 6to4 user A with a IPv4 ISPa wants to communicate
with an native IPv6 user B with an IPv6 ISPb:
- IPv4 ISPa has deployed a 6to4-to-native relay
- IPv6 ISPb has deployed a native-to-6to4 relay or has a peering agreement
  with someone who offer native-to-6to4 relay service.

This is an operational issue, are IPv6 ISPs doing this today?
If not, why?

   - Alain.