Re: 6to4 considered a bad thing

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

below...

On 2008-02-02 21:32, Kevin Day wrote:
> 
> On Feb 1, 2008, at 6:17 PM, james woodyatt wrote:
>>> Why should ISP X pay to run a 6to4 relay that would in essence offer
>>> transit
>>> for customers of other ISPs?
>>
>> No one here is asking for ISP X to advertise its 6to4 relays at public
>> anycast addresses (either IPv4 or IPv6) into the default free zone.
>>
> 
> While there may not be demands placed on any ISP to do so, there are a
> bunch of us who are doing it anyway. Which either is or isn't allowed
> under RFC3068, depending on who you ask.
> 
> Judging by the huge range of emails we've received since announcing
> 192.88.99.0/24 and 2002::/16 to the world, most ISP's and end user's
> knowledge of what 6to4 is ranges from "non-existent" to "misinformed".
> So, it's a pretty safe bet to say that there's a pretty large percentage
> of ISPs out there that have no current plans to either start their own
> relay, or make arrangements with someone who does.
> 
> So, I don't mind giving up a pretty trivial amount of bandwidth to help
> v6 adoption along - or at the very least do our part to make sure 6to4
> works for who we can.

Applause and kudos. Obviously, anyone who wants to filter those
announcements will do so.

     Brian

   Brian