One point about gateway-initiated 6rd is that the gateway IPv4 address can be truncated, depending on the length of mask used for the network device address space. That gives more bits for the routing part of This should be a considerable improvement on the compression available using straight 6rd, and gives a better chance of a 'sensibly' sized IPv6 prefix.
On 08/11/2010 6:53 PM, Ole Troan wrote: ...
2) my concern with using 6rd for this purpose is that while automatic tunneling by encoding the tunnel end point in the payload address is convenient. offering a 'sensible' sized IPv6 prefix to end users is going to be problematic. note this is purely a concern from a deployment perspective. I have no doubt that you can _use_ 6rd this way. just because we _can_, _should_ we? can you give some examples of how you deliver e.g. /56 or /64 to end users, using gi-6rd? (without expecting the SP to have a /16 of v6 space obviously). cheers, Ole _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
