Re: Routing with 6to4 *and* a tunnel
On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 02:15:09PM -0400, Michael Richardson wrote:
> If my friend Joe, down the street on the Cable Network and I are both
> doing IPv6, and we both have tunnels, then our traffic, which should
> travel literally 10s of meters, will travel 100s of km instead.
>
> If we were both using 6to4, we would, as you say, automatically tunnel
> between us.
>
> The reason to still have the tunnel, is just what you said: so that we
> can talk to 2001::/16 space.
Indeed. The only downside of 6to4 is that your subnet prefix changes
with your public v4 address. If you don't have a static v4 address, then
it'll be a bit less interesting to do, IMHO.
Of course, by properly setting up mobile IPv6 extensions, you could
sidestep this issue and get the best of both worlds; but since mobile
IPv6 requires a kernel patch and (IIUC) a working IPsec setup, this is
too much of a PITA to set up currently, I think.
--
The amount of time between slipping on the peel and landing on the
pavement is precisely one bananosecond
Reply to: