Comcast's 6to4 Relays
gih at apnic.net
Wed Apr 20 11:25:01 UTC 2011
On 20/04/2011, at 11:43 AM, Martin Millnert wrote:
>> Either way, there certainly IS a place in networks for Toredo services, since SO
>> MANY devices for the CPE end of the connectivity equation still have
>> zero support for IPv6.
If you are prepared to tolerate a connection failure rate in the
order of 37% or so, then I could agree with you, but that's a
pretty impressive failure rate!
> I must point you to Geoff Hustons most recent ISP posting:
> And there are some situations where it is OK that only 2 out of 3
> connections succeed, if it means your system can work better: Notably,
> peer-to-peer applications can make use of this to establish
> connections in a cloud, using DHT instead of DNS for peer propagation,
> and Teredo relays as the rendezvous mechanism.
In my opinion any service that runs at a 37% failure rate of
connections is a disservice. The peer-to-peer folk can tolerate its
miserable reliability and lousy performance because of the massive
redundancy in the peer-to-peer environment that means that that a peer-to-peer
player can just ignore the connections that fail. But do we need to head
to use applications that build in huge margins of oversupply in their
communications model just to tolerate the unreliability of Teredo?
More information about the NANOG