[6bone] IETF IPv6 connectivity

[Tim Chown]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 06:10:03AM +0900, itojun@iijlab.net wrote:
> >Some comments on -01.txt.  I think the dcoument as is makes the point well.
> >All we need are some agreed answers :)  I notice for example that from the
> >IETF here my IPv6 RTT to home (UK) is 400ms, as opposed to 100ms via IPv4.  
> 
> 	part of the reason is because we IIJ (providing IPv6 connectivity
> 	this time) have policy not to peer over tunnels, to keep quality of
> 	our IPv6 routes/paths.  so we have no direct reachability to Europe.
> 	the cause of issue is a bit different from 6bone-mess document.

It's a tradeoff between a short, good quality tunnel (e.g. to peer with
Abilene) and a long native route (i.e. going via Japan to get from one
part of the US to another).  In this case, the "native only" policy isn't
the best choice, although I respect your goal in the longer-term view.
 
> >(This is not a US-Europe thing per se as the Abilene-Europe link has near
> >identical RTT due to use of dual-stack links following a very similar path,
> >and no "errant" tunnels)
> 
> 	IIJ would like to peer with Abilene or any other ASes, of course,
> 	if they participate to any of the exchanges we are present.  we are
> 	present at:
> 		PAIX palo alto
> 		6TAP palo alto (L3 IX so there should be no config needed)
> 		NYIIX
> 		6IIX-NY
> 	and in japan:
> 		NSPIXP6
> 		NSPIXP2
> 		JPNAP6

Something for the Abilene folks to comment on... I'm sure Abilene is present
natively at one or more of these - the 6TAP especially :)   Thus the tunnel
point may be moot (although it doesn't help during the IETF as such).

Tim