RE: Teredo vs Silkroad

["Bound, Jim" <jim.bound@hp.com>]

I don't see any relays in Silkroad?
thanks
/jim 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christian Huitema
> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 11:58 AM
> To: Eiffel Wu; pekkas@netcore.fi
> Cc: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Teredo vs Silkroad
> 
> From an analysis of the drafts, it appears that silkroad is 
> closer to tunnel brokers than to Teredo. Silkroad relies on 
> the deployment of a large number of relays and servers, that 
> become part of the ISP
> infrastructure: this is very similar to the deployment of 
> tunnel servers by the ISP. It provides pretty much the same 
> advantages as tunnel brokers, i.e. stable addresses and 
> robust tunneling across different types of infrastructure.
> 
> The part of Silkroad that somewhat resemble Teredo is the 
> routing optimization between the tunnel servers (called SAR 
> in silkroad). I don't think that this is particularly 
> valuable: once you have reached an ISP router, you would 
> expect normal routing protocols to take over and route 
> packets along the optimal path. In fact, this feature will be 
> perceived as detrimental by many ISP, since it makes their 
> network management more complex than necessary. 
> 
> -- Christian Huitema
> 
> 
>