[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: IETF59 minutes and presentations
Hi Pekka,
I agree with your point of view, indeed we are working on this approach (more TBs, more "local") and for the "auto-location" of the TB, we are already working on several ideas, and will try to present something at the next meeting.
Regards,
Jordi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pekka Savola" <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>
Cc: <jonne.soininen@nokia.com>; <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2004 6:59 AM
Subject: Re: IETF59 minutes and presentations
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2004, Alain Durand wrote:
> > ==> I do not see how this scenario is fundamentally different
> > from the road warrior using IPv4 on a dial-up modem.
> > In many cases, he can call a well known centralized 1-800 number
> > that will create a suboptimal long path or he will have a phone number
> > for a local PoP, that will hopefully provide shorter RTT.
> > There is no 'find me the nearest PoP' protocol here.
> >
> > If we look at a tunnel broker as a virtual IPv6 ISP,
> > can someone point me how things are different?
>
> Road warrior has made a contract with an ISP, which is his back-up
> long-distance number. If we assume that all the users would have to
> make a contract/signup/whatever with a long-distance virtual IPv6 ISP,
> then this would probably be the case.
>
> What I'd like to get is when the local ISP is offering the tunnel
> service, the user would get directed there automatically, and would
> become aware of it so that he could start using that service instead
> (instead of using long-distance service).
>
> That is, I think we want to avoid these "long-distance calls", and we
> want to make it easier for the user to notice whether there is support
> in the local ISP. Additionally, the configuration of tunneling IMHO
> should be close to zero-config. (Looking up tunnel server addresses,
> signup forms, or whatever in the web is unacceptable -- and that's one
> reason why the tunnel broker model hasn't seemed to fly so well so
> far..)
>
> If we want to make this easy for the users, that seems like something
> that would have to be done. Especially if we insisted that we
> wouldn't need Teredo.
>
> Hopefully I answered your question..
>
> --
> Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
>
**********************************
Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
Presentations and videos on line at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.