Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet () consulintel es>]

Those are different things and I can't agree with you.

I¹m not saying that using a translator is the best thing to do. I will
prefer not to go that way, and that requires the services and contents to be
dual-stacked, but is better a translator than nothing if no other way.

Regarding the relays (I guess you mean relay when talking about gateways),
they are part of the transition, and they are required. You like it or not.
Actually I think they are a very good thing.

Unfortunately, we can't agree all to just switch off all the Internet,
upgrade to IPv6 and disable IPv4, so transition is needed and it is a smart
thing.

Regards,
Jordi





De: Manolo Hernandez <mhernand1 () comcast net>
Responder a: <mhernand1 () comcast net>
Fecha: Sun, 27 May 2007 13:50:14 -0400
Para: "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () verizonbusiness com>
CC: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet () consulintel es>, Nanog
<nanog () nanog org>
Asunto: Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

I believe that using a gateway or a translation device for ipv6-ipv4 just
gives people an excuse to ignore ipv6. I really do believe that if ipv6 is
to go full scale we have to jump in with everything ipv6 only or ipv4 the
intermediate will just postpone the inevitable.

Take that from experience, give the suits an out and they will take it
rather than taking the advised path which may cost more now but less down
the road when you have to pry it out of people to abandon the translation
servers.


Manolo


Chris L. Morrow wrote:
>  
>
>
> On Sun, 27 May 2007, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>   
>  
> >  
> > There are many things in Vista, and hopefully more to come, which prefer
> > IPv6 for peer-to-peer. And even if the ISPs don't offer IPv6 at all, hosts
> > use 6to4 or Teredo to automatically provide the required IPv6 connectivity.
> >     
> >  
>  
>
> is there a global-ipv6 -> terado gateway in existence yet? If not... it's
> not ipv6 connectivity. It's nat-traversal to a 'private' network which
> happens to use ipv6 addressing. Things like 6to4 won't really scale as a
> solution either :( if comcast's 20m clients wake up and 6to4 tunnel
> tomorrow someone's 6to4 tunnel server is going to be in big trouble :(
> (same for the 7.5m verizon dsl customers, which reminds me I need to get
> back to playing some more with a 6to4 gateway again)
>
> Anyway, Terado had always seemed like a nice solution to not the ipv6
> transition problem.
>
>   






**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be 
for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, 
copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.