Re: [v6ops] Another look at 6to4 (and other IPv6 transition issues)

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

 



In your letter dated Tue, 19 Jul 2011 08:26:26 +0900 you wrote:
>> Given that each of us reads something different into the definition of HISTO
>RIC, is there any hope that this thread will ever converge?
>
>I don't see any "progress".
>
>We may just have to blacklist any resolvers that have 6to4 clients
>behind them and leave it at that.

I don't think there is any need to be overly dramatic about it.

I firmly belive that 6to4 should be moved to historic. But at the same time,
I was looking for a poorly performing IPv6 connection to test happy eyeballs
and didn't find it. 6to4 can just work.

So a less aggressive approach might be in order.

(If you look at the numbers, there are fewer and fewer 6to4 connections to
dual-stack sites because modern operating system releases will prefer IPv4
over 6to4. Of the users who didn't upgrade, there is about 20% with a
completely broken 6to4 setup. What remains is slightly higher latency due to
non-optimal placement of relays)


_______________________________________________
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]