Re: [v6ops] Last Call: <draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-04.txt> (Request to move Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds (6to4) to Historic status) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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.

Tim

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]