Arjan Van Der Oest
Arjan at voiceworks.nl
Fri Sep 16 13:50:44 CEST 2011
On 16Sep, 2011, at 13:20 , Jeroen Massar wrote:
> That is indeed the point. As now you are starting your question from the
> middle of the equation while there are other options that might fit better.
Well, I'm used to asking non-ambigious questions that can be answered with non-ambigious answers. The how and why is not really relevant to my question: does anyone know a TSP solution? But ymmv :-)
>> Because Draytek does not support it.
> And to circle back to the 'current installed base', I assume that you
> currently have Draytek already deployed
That deduction seems only logical, yes.
> and thus it would 'merely' be a
> firmware upgrade away, because if that is the case I am very sure that
> you can make Draytek listen to that, having seen that they support both
> TSP and TIC/AYIYA/heartbeat and they are running off a Linux kernel, for
> them to add 6rd would be minimal effort.
Sure, but the truth is that *currently*, as in now Friday september the 16th it is not supported. Any development, regression testing and field deployment is going to take weeks if not months.
> If you want I can pass Draytek contacts who should be able to get you to
> the right people for getting that feature in.
I have the same contacts at Xpertdata, thanks for the offer ;-)
> IMHO it is always best to first list the 'current haves' and then the
> 'what we wants' and go from there, thus your statement of effectively "I
> need a TSP server" does not make clear to me if you tried to look at the
> alternatives, and that is something that might give insight to other
> folks on why you did or did not select that.
Although I can understand your curiosity and appreciate your willingness to assist me, I respectfully disagree.
When I e-mail a TAC with the question "what box supports VRRPv3" I would be surprised when they ask me "what are you trying to accomplish" ;-)
> The "IPv6 Transition Mechanism / Tunneling Comparison":
> comes to mind too. TSP is thus primarily useful for when you have
> endusers who are behind a NAT and have changing addresses.
Agree, but since 6rd and 6in4 are currently not supported: hence my question.
> which would mean quickly kicking the vendor to maybe add support.
Consider it already done.
Met vriendelijke groet,
Arjan van der Oest
Senior Network Engineer / Security Officer
Voiceworks BV - Editiestraat 29 - 1321 NG Almere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 4804 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20110916/7af473b6/attachment.bin
More information about the ipv6-ops