[153266] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 day and tunnels
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Mon Jun 4 10:33:15 2012
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <530ECE73-1DF6-4387-A27A-869724F291A5@unfix.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 10:31:28 -0400
To: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jun 4, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 4 Jun 2012, at 06:36, Masataka Ohta =
<mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote:
>=20
>> Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>=20
>>>>> So IPv6 fixes the fragmentation and MTU issues of IPv4 by how =
exactly?
>>>>=20
>>>> Completely wrongly.
>>>=20
>>> Got a better solution? ;)
>>=20
>> IPv4 without PMTUD, of course.
>=20
> We are (afaik) discussing IPv6 in this thread, I assume you typo'd =
here ;)
He is comparing & contrasting with the behavior of IPv4 v IPv6.
If your PMTU is broken for v4 because people do wholesale blocks of =
ICMP, there is a chance they will have the same problem with wholesale =
blocks of ICMPv6 packets.
The interesting thing about IPv6 is it's "just close enough" to IPv4 in =
many ways that people don't realize all the technical details. People =
are still getting it wrong with IPv4 today, they will repeat their same =
mistakes in IPv6 as well.
-
I've observed that if you avoid providers that rely upon tunnels, you =
can sometimes observe significant performance improvements in IPv6 =
nitrates. Those that are tunneling are likely to take a software path =
at one end, whereas native (or native-like/6PE) tends to not see this =
behavior. Those doing native tend to have more experience debugging it =
as well as they already committed business resources to it.
- Jared=
