Re: Routing with 6to4 *and* a tunnel
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:05:58PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 15:27 -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> > Yes, that's right.
> > If you can't get native IPv6, 6to4 is better than tunnels.
>
> Don't forget that 6to4 is also a tunnel ;)
> Actually the most significant difference is that 6to4 makes an automatic
> tunnel to the remote 6to4 site, one huge problem though, you can't
> easily reach RIR space because you need an upstream out of 2002::/16 for
> that.
I thought that is what the endpoint was for, 192.88.99.1. At least,
that's how Craig Small describes it.
<http://people.debian.org/~csmall/ipv6/setup624.html>
> Anyhow, if the 'tunnel' you mean is worse than 6to4 then I suggest you
> kick the provider of connectivity on the tunnel really and really hard
> or most likely easier change tunnel provider to one who does correctly
> take care of routing.
Freenet is not known to be fast or efficient.
> I suggest you take a look at for instance OCCAID who are doing a great
> job in the US and nowadays also European region: http://www.occaid.org.
Oddly, I cannot get there from a node on my network. tracepath6 works
from the router, but the autoconfigured node stops getting responses
when it reaches twdx.net. I'll have to look into this more later.
> If you just need connectivity, and you are in Europe you are of course
> also welcome to check SixXS: http://www.sixxs.net
I'd be really happy to be in Europe for this. AFAICT, everwhere but
the US is on the ball with IPv6.
> On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 13:56 -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
> > According to my ISP, the stall for IPv6 in the US is ARIN. They are
> > asking something like US$20G for an allocation--per year. The ISP
> > owner tells me that there just isn't sufficient demand for this to
> > make financial sense. Most (all?) other countries have their own
> > allocation policies which are not as onerous.
>
> Then your ISP is lying as when they currently have an IPv4 allocation an
> IPv6 allocation is for free. Point those lazy folks to this doc:
>
> http://www.arin.net/registration/guidelines/ipv6_initial_alloc.html
I did some research on this issue myself. It looks like the ipv6
allocation isn't really that expensive for ARIN members. The fee
waiver will expire and at that point, the ISP will have to pay
something for the address space.
In any event, I'm going to forward that page to them as well.
Thanks a lot for the help.
Reply to: