Re: v6-in-v4 configured tunneling over v4 multicast (vs 6over4)

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Tue, 11 May 2004, Erik Nordmark wrote:
> > If you want to create point-to-multipoint tunnels over v4 multicast
> > infrastructure, wouldn't the obvious solution be simply using
> > configured tunneling?  That is, you configure the tunnel destination
> > v4 address to be a multicast address (this requires zero code
> > changes), and the decapsulators configure their "local end" to be the
> > multicast address (requires code change in the tunnel setup tool to
> > permanently join the specified multicast address)?
> 
> This implies that all IPv6 (unicast and multicast) packets will be sent
> as IPv4 multicast, right?

Not necessarily -- sorry for failing to say that explicitly in the
first place (you guys couldn't read my mind yet?!?! :).  See the note
I wrote to Stig for clarification.
 
> While that might significantly increase the use of IPv4 multicast, it might
> have negative implications on the performance of the network :-)

Yes, it could be a problem -- a bit in the same way as 6over4 (in this
context) hass a problem.  But luckily enough, this would probably
apply only to v6 multicast of scope greater than link-local.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings