On Jun 14, 2011, at 1:43 PM, Ole Troan wrote: > making 6to4 historic does not affect 6rd. I think the draft says that much too. > I don't think we are saying that native necessarily is better than tunnels. > we are saying unmanaged tunnels crossing the Internet is bad. I think this misses the point. Most internet traffic is "unmanged". The fact that in the case of 6to4 the traffic is protocol 41 doesn't affect this. The real problem here is that there are relay routers that advertise connectivity to one or both anycast addresses via BGP, that aren't properly managed. A related problem, I suppose, is that to a user, 6to4 looks like "the network". And if there's a problem, the user will blame "the network" and ask "the network" support people to fix it. And quite often the problem is not in the access network but in another network. But (and please forgive my ignorance of operational issues) I don't see how that's inherently different from any case where there's a BGP advertisement to somewhere that blackholes traffic. Except maybe that there are a growing number of 6to4 users who can complain, and that all 6to4-related problems tend to get lumped together in the minds of support people even if they're caused by different networks and routers. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf