On Jun 14, 2011, at 2:16 PM, Tony Hain wrote: > Keith is correct, and the further issue is that the *-only-* reason the > 'poorly managed' relays are in the path is that the content providers are > refusing to deploy the matching 6to4 router that would take a direct > connection from the customer. Well, to be fair, they weren't supposed to have to get involved with 6to4 if they didn't want to. To the extent that 6to4 causes pain for operators that don't provide relay routers, this is a mostly-unanticipated and unintended consequence. (Operators weren't expected to *like* 6to4, because at the time 6to4 was written there was a general dislike for tunnels in general. But neither was it expected to cause them as much pain as it apparently does.) > 6to4 direct between the content and consumer is still an 'unmanaged' tunnel > which takes exactly the same path as IPv4 would, so the 'badness' is not due > to managed vs. not. In the grand scheme of things, the last thing the > content providers want is for the network to wrest control over streams into > a walled-garden model. Unfortunately they are not thinking this through, > they are just whining because the deployment of a second prefix on their > content servers does not conform to their IPv4-think dream world. Though it's clear that some operators want to impose the walled garden, I think 6to4 can cause some pain even for those that don't. I'm hopeful that this pain will be short-lived and will be remedied in the short term by (a) relay router operators acting more responsibly, (b) content-providers providing their own 6to4 addresses, their own 6to4 gateways for return traffic, and/or (c) (less ideally) DNS tricks to minimize IPv6 exposure to networks known to have trouble with 6to4. In the not-so-much-longer term I hope the pain is relieved by widespread adoption of native IPv6 or at least "managed" transition schemes such as 6rd. But did we really expect there to not be growing pains associated with IPv6 transition and deployment? We certainly had them with IPv4 transition and deployment. After all, 6to4 is pretty much the ARPAnet/MILnet to Internet transition revisited; that's where I got the idea. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf