APNIC IPv6 transit exchange

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 29 nov 2007, at 15:41, Jeroen Massar wrote:

>> but opposes to the idea
>> of the exchange of full routing tables between peers. full table  
>> swaps
>> would lead to problems that rather delay successful deployment of  
>> quality
>> IPv6. If that is really what APNIC is planing then i am concerned.

Note that that's not what APNIC is doing, although if people don't pay  
attention this could easily be what ends up happening. Multilateral  
peering means that a route server exchanges everything between  
everyone. The members shouldn't be doing the same thing.

> What is not a win btw is setting up tunnels which send traffic to  
> APNIC
> and then sending the traffic back over the same physical pipe, but
> different tunnel.

Good point. Some kind of multipoint tunnel, such as 6to4, would be  
more appropriate here. That way, traffic from Japan to Thailand  
doesn't have to go through Australia. We probably have some kind of  
arcane IPv6 tunneling technique that is appropriate for this...Î