On Jun 7, 2011 12:16 AM, "Tim Chown" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 7 Jun 2011, at 07:33, Gert Doering wrote: > > > > > Do we really need to go through all this again? > > > > As long as there is no Internet Overlord that can command people to > > a) put up relays everywhere and b) ensure that these relays are working, > > 6to4 as a general mechanism for attachment to the IPv6 Internet is FAIL. > > > > If someone wants to use 6to4 to interconnect his machines over an IPv4 > > infrastructure (=6to4 on both ends), nobody is taking this away. > > > > Gert Doering > > -- NetMaster > > Exactly. > > Less than 1% of the IPv6 traffic reaching us is 6to4. And 6to4 in its 6to4-to-native mode is proven to be highly unreliable. It seems highly preferable to have that 1% wait for native IPv6 to be available to them, rather than being used as a reason by the bigger content providers for holding back production deployment, which is what we all want to see. > > It's time to remove the stabilisers on the IPv6 bicycle. >
+1. Let's move on and not repeat this tired discussion. Cb > Tim > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
