Re: is source address binding more valuable for IPv6?
>>>>> Pascal Hambourg <pascal.mail@plouf.fr.eu.org> writes:
IS> Do I understand it correctly, that the 6to4 and Teredo tunneling
IS> transition mechanisms work by establishing ``implicit'' tunnels,
PH> Yes, you can say that.
IS> and, thus, are subject to the already existing IPv4 routing,
PH> The tunneling packets are.
IS> while 6in4 routes the packets via the chosen IPv6 provider?
PH> 6in4 is just the encapsulation method (protocol 41) used by 6to4,
PH> and one of the encapsulation methods used by some IPv6 tunnel
PH> brokers (which are what you call "IPv6 providers" I guess).
Yes, thanks for the clarification. I've meant specifically the
latter.
IS> Thus, it seems sensible for a single host to always implement
IS> Teredo or 6to4, even if as an addition to 6in4, in order to utilize
IS> the existing IPv4 routing. (Consider, e. g., two friends with
IS> hosts connected to the network of some IPv4 provider; the use of
IS> 6in4 implies that the traffic will be routed via yet another,
IS> possibly distant, IPv6, provider, while with either Teredo or 6to4,
IS> the packets will be routed directly via the IPv4 provider's
IS> network, resulting in lower latency, bandwidth consumption, etc.)
PH> IPv4 routing between two hosts may not be straightforward either.
Indeed. But then it'll be the thing that ``the customers'' have
to live with.
IS> May it therefore make sense for all the IPv6-compatible network
IS> software to support source IPv6 binding?
PH> Not more than for a classic multihomed IPv4 host, IMO.
Yes. However, since of the above, it seems to me that IPv6
multihoming may be somewhat more useful. (Please forgive me if
my thoughts aren't quite clear at this time.)
As an example, please consider a home network that uses both
6to4 addresses (to utilize the IPv4 routing) /and/ the addresses
obtained thanks to a tunnel broker (to be independent of the
IPv4 address, especially if it isn't static; or since there may
ocassionally be IPv6-networks lacking both 6to4 routing and IPv4
connectivity whatsoever.)
PS. My colleges are surprisingly eager to learn IPv6:
http://theory.asu.ru/~ivan/ipv6-test1/
--
FSF associate member #7257
Reply to: