6to4 borkeness (Was: Google and IPv6)

[Joe Abley]

On 19 Mar 2008, at 13:07 , Steve Wilcox wrote:

> There is no 6to4 at Google today, whether there should be one I'm  
> seeing arguments pro and con. But it seems somewhat orthogonal as  
> there is no guarantee that having a 6to4 here would be the one that  
> inbound packets are taking and providing we make sure that the  
> outbound is going through a reliable path (I noted earlier that the  
> your.org 6to4 was selected in Amsterdam) what would hosting a relay  
> fix?

The problem you could hope to fix at Google is having a stable route  
for 2002::/16 that leads somewhere that you control. That would  
eliminate the dependence on a third party for encaps of your reply  
traffic back towards 2002::/16-numbered clients.

> Perhaps more pressure on transit providers to find better (and  
> untunneled)
> IPv6 paths would also be helpful... ;-)

Well, true, but that will have near-zero effect on vista clients  
connected to networks whose last mile isn't going to feature native v6  
any time soon.


Joe