Hi Gert, On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 08:51:26 +0200 Gert Doering <gert@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 12:15:17PM +0930, Mark Smith wrote: > > I have a vested interest in anycast 6to4 continuing to exist, > > This actually brings up a good argument: > > are you going to pay for us to run our 6to4 relay? > > > not that the cost of it is high, but there is cost to it - to make sure > it keeps working, to monitor the system for overload, etc. > It was a conscious decision of yours to announce it globally, so you've made a conscious decision to provide it to people for free and to take on the operational responsibilities of doing so. If you become unhappy with accepting those costs without corresponding compensation, withdraw the 6to4 anycast IPv4 address from the global route table, and people like me would move onto another 6to4 relay automatically. I certainly don't take for granted people's generosity in providing them to global users, however I think that if you choose to do something charitable, you have then created an obligation on yourself to do it well and reliably. Most people both understand and deliver on that obligation. I've actually become more conscious of this lack of financial incentive since I've noticed that youtube videos are coming to me over IPv6. That's what prompted me to ask if my ISP was planning to deploy a 6to4 relay soon as an interim step towards their native service. > Our customers don't really need it (because we have native IPv6), we're > offering this for free to benefit users on the other side that do not > have native IPv6, but insist on not using IPv4. > > > And this also points out why anycasted 6to4 is necessarily(!) less > reliable than those other Internet technologies that you have mentioned - > because those that run the relays usually have no financial interest in > doing so. So if it breaks, it will take longer to notice and even longer > to fix than for something that directly affects paying customers. > Actually, a broken local 6to4 relay is likely to be impacting your paying customers too as it is their local 6to4 relay. Your arguments are not specific to 6to4 though - I think they apply to anybody providing a free configured tunnel service too. In some cases they apply more so - the administrative effort to support automated provisioning of configured tunnels is greater than that involved in setting up an anycast 6to4 relay. Regards, Mark. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf