On Jun 14, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Keith Moore wrote: > On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > >> On Jun 14, 2011, at 11:16 AM, Tony Hain wrote: >> >>> Keith is correct, and the further issue is that the *-only-* reason the >>> 'poorly managed' relays are in the path is that the content providers are >>> refusing to deploy the matching 6to4 router that would take a direct >>> connection from the customer. >>> >>> 6to4 direct between the content and consumer is still an 'unmanaged' tunnel >>> which takes exactly the same path as IPv4 would, so the 'badness' is not due >>> to managed vs. not. >> >> And the breakage still exists even if you do that. > > do "what"?
deploy your own relay, as observed by geoff and others that does not rehabilitate (by which I mean make it usable for those customers) 6to4. > As I understand it, the breakage mostly happens when the traffic doesn't > take exactly the same path as IPv4 would, but rather when the traffic moves > between the IPv4 world and the IPv6 world (or vice versa) via a relay router > that's advertising a route to a network that it can't actually get traffic to. > > Though of course there are other sources of breakage: ISPs that filter > protocol 41 (thus violating the "best effort" model); and NATs, including > LSNs. Neither of these is 6to4's fault. it results in a failure from the vantage point of the customer. you're splitting hairs pretty fine if you not willing to ascribe that to 6to4. > The IPv4 network is supposed to make a best effort to convey traffic from > source to destination, regardless of protocol type, without altering it other > than the TTL field. If ISPs break 6to4 traffic by filtering protocol 41, > that's clearly their fault. Likewise, if ISPs break 6to4 traffic by imposing > NAT on their customers, that's also quite clearly their fault. It's not like > we haven't known FOR TWENTY YEARS NOW (remember Kobe?) that the Internet was > running out of addresses and had a standardized replacement in place FOR OVER > FIFTEEN YEARS. > > If an ISP that has aggressively deployed IPv6 wants to whine about 6to4 > support issues, I guess they have a legitimate gripe. > > Keith >
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
