Hi Ole, I agree with you the host model isn't very attractive for average users. If IPv4 can get me to every site, why I want to install a software to bring me to the same set of sites over v6? 6rd is great tech, users don't need to do anything. The only drawback is users will have to change the CPE. For some operators, this may be a hurdle.
I can't say how bad operators want to support IPv6 over legacy CPEs. If there is demand. Can somebody (except me :-) ) speak it out? Thanks, Yiu On 10/7/10 9:45 AM, "Ole Troan" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> This is an interesting idea, but I will argue this is as complex as L2TP >>> softwire. When Brian, Remi and I discussed, we would like to have a simple >>> and cost effective technology that could be deployed by SP w/o upgrading the >>> CPE. >> >> Indeed. >> We need some reliable and easily deployable solutions for IPv6 use to become >> widespread, including in hosts behind legacy CPEs. > > why? > > my personal experience with host tunneling hasn't been great (ISATAP, Teredo, > 6to4, configured, L2TP). and do ISPs really have an interest in supporting > individual hosts? and be exposed to all of their peculiarities? > > it appears to me that we are filling in every possible square in the solution > matrix. just because it is possible doesn't mean that it is useful or > deployable... > > cheers, > Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
