For core networks I will suggest to use pure dual-stack or MPLS/6PE. In the worst case, if you can't do that, just use manually configured tunnels. For the upstream, dual-stack or again manually configured tunnels (6in4/protocol-41 or GRE). 6to4, in general, is useful for end users with a public IPv4 address. Teredo for those behind NAT. 6to4 and Teredo are already being used by users when their ISPs doesn't provide any IPv6 service at all. But they can also be used by ISPs as an easy and low-cost means while they can't offer dual-stack to the access, by deploying Teredo and 6to4 relays, in order to improve the availability of IPv6 in their access network w/o any major cost. As indicated a couple of days ago, I'm starting a thread about this in AfriNIC (English) and LACNIC (Spanish) in a very few days. I will drop a message here to remind about that in case people is interested to follow it (prefer to cross-post in several mail exploders). The thread will explain how to deploy those protocols and help to resolve any issues. For Teredo, we will use Miredo, the open source version. For 6to4, as it is supported in router vendors and hosts, we will explain both of them. Regarding how many boxes, I think it will be useful just staring with one in each network and monitor the traffic level. Then you will realize if it make sense to have more, such as in every PoP, or something similar. Those protocols work stand-alone, not special operational support required, and very low cost boxes can make it, at least at this stage. One more alternative, in terms of next steps planning, for access networks which can't, at the time being, deploy dual-stack (example DOCSIS 2.0, xDSL that can't be upgraded yet, etc.), is softwires (L2TP), but I'm not sure implementations are fully ready yet. I will bet that in 1-2 years, it will be the best choice and will be able to replace 6to4 and Teredo. Last, but not least, the major vendor (Microsoft) supports Teredo (as well as 6to4) in both XP and Vista. In Vista it gets enabled by default when no native IPv6 connectivity is available, but Microsoft own applications use Teredo only for peer-to-peer. If no native is present, then 6to4 is the 2nd choice for client-server apps. This is following the policy table for source/destination address selection. But other applications may use Terede as well for client-server. For example Teredo is not used by Internet Explorer if IPv4 connectivity is available, but if you use Opera, it prefers Teredo even if IPv4 is available, because is ignoring the policy table. The policy table can be manually configured. All the information about this is available at: About the policy table/XP: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/guides&id=2 About the policy table/Vista: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/guides&id=13 About 6to4: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/6to4 About Teredo: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/teredo LG at: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/looking_glass Config guides at: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=using/connectivity/guides Hopefully all this is useful. I'm working in a tool to be able to measure all the IPv6 traffic in a network, even if it is using Teredo, 6to4, others, so we can realize, in a few months of measurements (if people different networks is volunteering fromto use this software and provide data) if IPv6 traffic (all, peer-to-peer and client-server) is growing. The tool will work EVEN if you don't support IPv6 in your network, so it will show if some transition traffic is passing thru. Regards, Jordi
De: <michael.dillon@bt.com> Responder a: <owner-nanog@merit.edu> Fecha: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:41:17 +0100 Para: <nanog@nanog.org> Conversación: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Asunto: RE: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
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.
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.
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?
--Michael Dillon
********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 ! http://www.ipv6day.org This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.