6to4 stats found, are there other places?

[Ole Troan]

Jordi,

> It will be important that you then voice up your opinion in v6ops.
> 
> I'm just having this discussion because they are trying to kill it. Yes,
> the argument is "is not killing it, but making it off by default", but
> this is not what the vendors will read.

"they"? I thought I saw you in Prague? ;-)

at the IETF80 we discussed a two pronged approach:
 - make 6to4 historic. provide a statement that can be referenced in a standards document that 6to4 should be off by default.
 - 6to4 advisory. as it will take some time before CPEs and host implementations are upgraded, encourage operators to
   do what little is possible to improve 6to4.

are you arguing that I should go back to our consumer products (Linksys) people and ask them to enable 6to4 by default again?
I'm not pretending to speak for all vendors (not even the one I'm working for), but if you are trying to create a scare that vendors will remove 6to4 from their code base, then a couple of data points is that NAT-PT and Automatic tunnels (from rfc1933) are still in IOS.

as there is considerable statistics from people like Geoff, Tore, Emile, showing how badly 6to4 performs, I think for you to argue against making it historic, you should show that they are wrong... or show us how it can be fixed.

please read rfc5218. a protocol that requires every other remote network in the Internet to upgrade or change their behaviour has little chance to succeed.

cheers,
Ole