[129279] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Comcast enables 6to4 relays
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Andrews)
Tue Aug 31 18:14:29 2010
To: "Mitchell Warden" <wardenm@wardenm.net>
From: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:22:03 +1000."
<20100831062203.be89ed60@mail.wardenm.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2010 08:13:57 +1000
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In message <20100831062203.be89ed60@mail.wardenm.net>, "Mitchell Warden" writes
:
> > The list seems to be showing relays that announce both the IPv4 and the
> > IPv6 anycast prefixes.
> >
> > I have noticed a number of deployments that announce the (in)famous IPv4
> > prefix and then consider their deployment complete. I suspect that there
> > is a lack of 2002::/16 announcements and this would be contributing to
> > the regular problems with return paths.
> >
> > Obviously the IPv6 content networks benefit the most from having a relay
> > translating back to IPv4.
> >
> > Anyone have experience with this?
> >
> > --
> > Graham Beneke
>
> Is there a reason not to advertise more specific prefixes from 2002::/16
> to ensure that traffic for your v4 routes comes back to your own 6to4
> router?
>
> If for example all my users have v4 addresses in 192.0.2.0/24, I could
> advertise 2002:C002:0000::/40 instead of or in addition to the full
> 2002::/16.
>
> Cheers.
> Mitchell
Which would end up with the entire set of IPv4 routes in IPv6. This is
not a good idea. Just do you part and encapuslate/decapsulate as
soon as possible and let the other end do the same.
Mark
--
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
