Do I understand it correctly, that the 6to4 and Teredo tunneling
transition mechanisms work by establishing ``implicit'' tunnels,
and, thus, are subject to the already existing IPv4 routing,
while 6in4 routes the packets via the chosen IPv6 provider?
Thus, it seems sensible for a single host to always implement
Teredo or 6to4, even if as an addition to 6in4, in order to
utilize the existing IPv4 routing. (Consider, e. g., two
friends with hosts connected to the network of some IPv4
provider; the use of 6in4 implies that the traffic will be
routed via yet another, possibly distant, IPv6, provider, while
with either Teredo or 6to4, the packets will be routed directly
via the IPv4 provider's network, resulting in lower latency,
bandwidth consumption, etc.)
May it therefore make sense for all the IPv6-compatible network
software to support source IPv6 binding?
--
FSF associate member #7257
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
