[6bone] Re: routing concern

[Christian Schild]

Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2002 12:10 schrieben Sie:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2002 at 11:13:36 -0700, Michel Py wrote:
> > As I said before, the 6bone is the right place for this. Has anyone been
> > hurt? Anyone lost money? The lessons we collectively learn each time
> > someone messes up a route are far more valuable than the consequences of
> > messing up the route.
>
> Is it time to start making a clear distinction between IPv6 production
> and IPv6 experimentation/learning? I think today the 6bone is used for
> both.
>
> Many use IPv6 for their daily work *). We *need* a stable network for
> that.  If we don't do that we risk scaring people away from IPv6. Most
> OSes support IPv6 nowadays. When an enduser starts using IPv6 for the
> first time and she notices all kinds of networking problems, many will
> think: "OK, let's turn off IPv6. It does not work."
>
> The RIR prefixes are meant for IPv6 production. So, I think they should
> not be used on the 6bone. The 6bone should only be used for experiments
> and possibly learning. And on the other hand, I think production services
> should not use 6bone prefixes, but RIR prefixes.
>
> 	rvdp
>
> *) I frequently use ftp, cvs and http over IPv6 to sites far away in
> the internet. Too often, there are routing problems and IPv6 traffic
> is blackholed (routing loops, etc). Most application time out and try
> IPv4. But this means annoying delays. Many of these problems occur
> because people are running production services over the 6bone.

I completely support this view. 

I would go that far to say, that today's 6bone is hindering IPv6 
deployment, as the IPv6 network is rated unreliable and slow. This is 
mainly caused by the 6bone, having tunnels over long IPv4 distances and 
having unreliable and playful pTLA's. 

What was good before (to get started with IPv6) is evil now, because 
people don't differentiate between 6bone and the productive network we 
are trying to build.

In my opinion, the best solution to solve this problem, is to seperate
the 3ffe:: from the 2001:: network. There are a few ways to do so, maybe 
someone will come up with a draft for that, maybe as an enhancement
for RFC2772? 

I believe it is very important for everyone to understand that 6bone is 
not 'the' IPv6 network. 

So long,
     Christian
 

-- 
JOIN - IP Version 6 in the WiN  Christian Schild
                 A DFN project  Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster
Project Team email:             Zentrum fuer Informationsverarbeitung
          join@uni-muenster.de  Roentgenstrasse 9-13
http://www.join.uni-muenster.de D-48149 Muenster / Germany
email: schild@uni-muenster.de,phone: +49 251 83 31638, fax: +49 251 83 31653