why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

Nathan Ward nanog at daork.net
Wed May 30 13:34:03 UTC 2007


On 30/05/2007, at 11:41 PM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:

>
>> Before someone starts it, the debate between transition
>> protocols to use is well and truely over. Teredo and 6to4
>> have been chosen for use by the software vendors of the end
>> systems. (fine by me)
>
> This is misleading. You are using IPv6 jargon (transition protocol)
> whose meaning is not obvious. For most ISPs, "transition" refers to  
> the
> entire series of steps up to running a ubiquitous IPv6 network where
> IPv4 is a legacy support service. In that sense, Teredo and 6to4  
> are not
> magic bullets because they merely deal with the first steps of such a
> transition.

Fair enough. Alternative suggestions? :-)

> I do agree that Teredo and 6to4 are very important right now, as  
> far as
> taking actions, but for planning, we need to look well beyond IPv6
> transition protocols.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that.

> Since we are all collectively playing catchup at this point, it  
> would be
> very useful for some clear guidance on who needs to deploy Teredo and
> 6to4 and where it needs to be deployed. Also, the benefits of  
> deployment
> versus the problems caused by not having it. Should this be in  
> every PoP
> or just somewhere on your network? Are there things that can be  
> measured
> to tell you whether or not lack of Teredo/6to4 is causing user  
> problems?

A quick look through the NANOG historical slideware suggests very  
little mention of Teredo. Again, someone from Microsoft who can fill  
that gap might be useful. And probably someone who's using Miredo (an  
opensource/free implementation).

I've been doing a lot of thinking/writing about deploying these  
things in the real world so I can knock up some pictures+notes, but  
again, better to hear from someone else who's done/doing it, rather  
than someone who's been playing/thinking. I assume there is someone..

--
Nathan Ward



More information about the NANOG mailing list