Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:47:11 -0700

On Apr 19, 2011 2:56 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" <swmike () swm pp se> wrote:

On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Doug Barton wrote:

Another view (one that I personally hold) is that any effort you might be
putting into making 6to4 work better would be better placed in deploying
real IPv6 instead; and that the world would be a better place generally if
all of the so-called "transition mechanisms" just went away.


I am all for getting fewer people to use 6to4, especially without them
actually making a decision to use it, but giving more people access to high
quality (I hope they are) 6to4 relays is seldom a downside.

The drafts you mention make special notes that operators should NOT start
to shut down relays, first of all we need to get fewer people to use 6to4,
THEN we start to remove the relays. Starting at the relay end is bad, mmkay.


+1. 6to4 is very bad and should be off my default, but unfortunately many
end users unwittingly have it on and this may provide them some relief.

More ipv6 leadership from the Comcast camp. Keep it up.

Cb
--
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike () swm pp se



  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]