Re: Opportunistic Tunneling

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback.  Two comments inline.

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004, Bob Hinden wrote:
> >As the Unmanaged Analysis document is currently at WG Last Call, the
> >biggest issue appears to be the so-called "opportunistic tunneling",
> >i.e., automatic tunneling which would be possible without set-up or
> >ISP support.  Examples of these are 6to4 and Teredo. (No other
> >specific proposals have been made.)  We need to figure out how to move
> 
> I thought ISTAP fell into this category as well?  There have been a seres 
> of drafts.

No, ISATAP is not really applicable AFAICS.  Remember that the topic
here is "opportunistic tunneling" -- with a requirement that the
tunneling works independent of ISPs, automatically.  ISATAP requires
ISATAP router and set-up.

On the other hand, when your ISP wants to give you IPv6 access using
tunneling, ISATAP could be on the table (but that was a separate
subject).

[...]
> >  2) What are the models for deploying relays, considering the economic
> >     or deployment considerations (in-host, in-site, network)?
> >      * And what are the implications of any approach?
> >      * Can we decide on the recommended model?
> 
> I think the answer to this can be found by looking at what is deployed 
> now.  In any case, I didn't think the IETF needs to be discussion economic 
> models.

Economic models, to an extent, make deployments realistic (or not), so 
I personally think this is somewhat of a factor in the discussions 
whether to recommend some model for deployment.  Of course, the IETF 
cannot _force_ anyone to a model.
 
-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings