[139783] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Tue Apr 19 17:55:38 2011
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:55:33 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
In-Reply-To: <4DAE0396.7050409@dougbarton.us>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>, "Brzozowski,
John" <John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Tue, 19 Apr 2011, Doug Barton wrote:
> Another view (one that I personally hold) is that any effort you might
> be putting into making 6to4 work better would be better placed in
> deploying real IPv6 instead; and that the world would be a better place
> generally if all of the so-called "transition mechanisms" just went
> away.
I am all for getting fewer people to use 6to4, especially without them
actually making a decision to use it, but giving more people access to
high quality (I hope they are) 6to4 relays is seldom a downside.
The drafts you mention make special notes that operators should NOT start
to shut down relays, first of all we need to get fewer people to use 6to4,
THEN we start to remove the relays. Starting at the relay end is bad,
mmkay.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
