Re: Routing with 6to4 *and* a tunnel
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 01:49:08PM +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 10:38:06AM -0700, Marc Singer wrote:
> > 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>
>
> The problem with 192.88.99.1 is it depends on someone nearby offering
> up a 6to4 gateway, and advertising it, and the advertisements getting
> to you.
>
> From my machines in Canberra, Australia, the nearest anycast node
> on 192.88.99.1 is in Switzerland, 300ms away.
>
> So I run 6to4 for talking to other 6to4 machines, but run a tunnel
> (and use _it_ in DNS as it's staticly addressed) to broker.aarnet.net.au,
> which is good if you're in Australia.
>
> My old ADSL connection through Comindico used to have 300ms to the
> tunnel broker (hence my addition of 6to4) but now I get 40ms through
> my new TransACT TalkWEB going out via MCI.
I believe that this was made clear in the rest of the thread. All I
was pointing out was that 6to4 *can* work if there is a gateway router
close by. One is not required to use both 6to4 and a tunnel.
However, that is a better solution than either is alone.
I've asked my ISP to support a 6to4 gateway router. If he does, it
means that all of his customers should get excellent throughput
without having to get bonafide IPv6 addresses. Certainly, if he has
the address space it would be advantageous to the users. 6to4 is just
do darn easy to setup, tho.
Cheers.
Reply to: