Re: Teredo vs Silkroad

[lidefeng <77cronux.leed0621@huawei.com>]

Silkroad can configure the Silkroad Clients with structured consecutive
global IPv6 addresses, without any special prefix like Teredo, this feature
will do good to the IPv6 routes aggregation in the network, which will
condense the amount of IPv6 routes entries.

Besides, Silkroad is more compatible with the current network and the
requirements of NAT customers, it is much easier to deploy in the network.

To deploy Teredo, Teredo Server should be added to help setup the connection
with Teredo Client, and Teredo Relay function is needed at the routers
access to IPv6 sites, and Teredo Relay Teredo Server should both traverse
NAT, all these demands requires the updation to the router access to IPv6
sites. and the number of such routers will be very large, so the updation
work is somewhat painful for the customers.

While Silkroad can be compatible with the current network, the routers
needn't be updated, even the Silkroad Navigator is not needed in the simple
netowrk,and the SAR(Silkroad Access Server) can be deployed at any place in
the network.



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "rengrong wang" <rengronw@usc.edu>
To: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 2:31 PM
Subject: Teredo vs Silkroad


> Hi,
>
> In draft-liumin-v6ops-silkroad-01.txt it is said that Silkroad wants to
enable nodes located behind one or several IPv4 NATs to obtain IPv6
connectivity and it seems like a tunnel-broker solution.
> It is known that Teredo is a automatic tunnel mechanism that figures out
the same problem.
>
> What's the difference between Silkroad and Teredo?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Crisy(Rengrong) Wang
> =======================================
> USC,EE-Systems
>
>