On 6to4 gateway and recommended MTU setting

Jeroen Massar jeroen at unfix.org
Thu Mar 11 13:52:58 CET 2010

Martin Millnert wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 12:58 +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> The better question is actually: why bother with 6to4?
> I think you missed in what light I posed the question.  I'm asking as a
> provider of a relay. We announce it to other networks and they use it.

If it is in another network then you do not know the MTU of the IPv4
link, thus then especially it just can be 1280.

> The "please kill 6to4"-thing is... within the other thread.

After you created that thread, maybe it belongs there.

>> Yes, it is a nice quick deployment strategy, but for anything long term,
>> go native... (or at least native addresses using 6rd or something).
> As for our own end-users, barring crappy WLAN APs with built-in stupid
> NAT, nice and neat native IPv6 have been available for some 8 years now.

Then why bother with a 6to4 relay that other networks are using? Then
again, your money.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20100311/54a9ee67/attachment.bin 

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list