nanog mailing list archives
Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays
From: Matthew Petach <mpetach () netflight com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:00:53 -0700
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Bhoomi Jain <bhoomij () india com> wrote:
Mr. John, I thank you for asking the advice of the community. As our colleagues suggest, having 6to4 relays inside the network helps to reduce the latency. Opening up your generous services to a larger Internet community by advertising the 192.88.99.0/24 BGP prefix outside the network could have extreme and unintended consequences. To give you an idea, a lot of the Internet in India depends on the service of the Tata companies, with international routing coming from Tata Communications AS 6453. Announcing 192.88.99.0/24 to 6453 as a customer, I would worry about its treatment as BGP best-path, in place of closer 6to4 relays. As you understand, these circuits are very far away, and also very full. This is not something I would recommend. Sincerely, Bhoomi Jain
On the contrary; I think Comcast announcing their 6to4 relays through TATA could be just the incentive the Internet needs to kick the 6to4 habit completely, and decide once and for all the only sane option is dual-stack native. ;-) Matt
Current thread:
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays, (continued)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Steven Bellovin (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Jim Gettys (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Doug Barton (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays TJ (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Matthew Petach (Apr 19)
- RE: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Antonio Querubin (Apr 19)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)
- RE: Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Bhoomi Jain (Apr 20)
- Re: Comcast's 6to4 Relays Owen DeLong (Apr 20)