North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Deploying 6to4 outbound routes at the border (was Re: IPv6 news)

  • From: Todd Vierling
  • Date: Fri Oct 14 22:50:02 2005

On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, Daniel Roesen wrote:

> > It's as simple as setting up a route to 2002::/16 at the border
> > with a 6to4 conversion.
> The problem is building a high performance gateway. Currently you have
> about the following two options:
> a) set up / configure a Cisco used as 6to4 gateway
> b) set up a dedicated host (Unix box) as 6to4 gateway
> Approach a) is good for only few traffic, really.

You know, I still barely remember when I thought IOS could do just about
anything efficiently.  Wow, have times changed.

Maybe to start -- but again, what kind of 6to4 traffic level are we
expecting yet?  It's the chicken and egg all over again.

> Approach b) is more complex.

Yes, unfortunately.

> I'm waiting for vendor J to enable option c)... implementing 6to4 via
> the Tunnel PIC (or other PICs including the Tunnel PIC functionalities
> like Link Services PIC). It's a very simple translation/encapsulation
> which doesn't require any state keeping, shouldn't be a big deal. I can
> imagine a few larger IPv6 ISPs then suddenly implementing 6to4 gateways.

The only thing that makes 6to4 more complex, compared to a plain IPIP (or
GRE, or any other point-to-point vanilla tunnel protocol) tunnel is that the
far-side endpoint changes based on the tunneled payload.

That said, it should *not* be an unsurmountable problem -- if the demand is
there.  Has anyone seen if the chicken laid the hatching egg yet?

-- Todd Vierling <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>