Microsoft and Teredo
nanog at daork.net
Thu May 31 11:51:18 UTC 2007
On 31/05/2007, at 11:27 PM, Sean Siler wrote:
> While these are really good questions, I'm afraid I don't have
> really good answers to them yet. We haven't made the bits
> available for customers to install their own Teredo Servers/Relays
> at this point, and because we haven't, we also don't have good
> deployment guidance to go along with that.
> I have my own feelings, but let me ask this: what do you all feel
> about installing a Teredo server in order to provide v6
> connectivity to your clients? Is this something that you are really
> interested in?
Considering that Teredo <-> (6to4|native) connectivity requires going
through at least a relay, and that hosts behind NAT who get AAAA
records will use Teredo, then yes, absolutely, it appears as though
as a service provider, I don't have much choice.
I'd also prefer to put at least one server (or group of servers) in
to my network, to remove reliance on third parties to bootstrap the
While Teredo through public servers/relays may perform OK right now
for people in North America and Europe who are topologically (on a
global scale) near to Teredo servers/relays, for people like myself
in New Zealand for example, we get 150ms-ish RTT to the nearest
publicly available server/relay. As such, if I turn v6 on on my
content, then a non-zero (and currently increasing!) amount of
visitors to my pages will see their traffic go to the US and back,
which means a performance/user experience hit.
In addition, as more and more people become Teredo clients, those
public relays need to do more and more. I'd prefer to be able to give
a better chance of good network service quality, by bringing that in-
More information about the NANOG