Re: [v6ops] 6to4v2 (as in ripv2)?

[Tim Chown <[e-mail]>]

On 27 Jul 2011, at 17:03, Mark Andrews wrote:

> [e-mail]>, Tim Chown writes:
>> 
>> a) use 6to4 anyway on an open platform like OpenWRT
> 
> Which may or may not still have the code.  OpenWRT could remove
> support just the same as another source could.  OpenWRT is also not
> widely supported by CPE vendors.  i.e. you are own your own if
> something goes wrong in most (not all) cases.

In the event OpenWRT should remove 6to4 support, just get like-minded people together (if there are lots of people that consciously want to use 6to4 for application development and testing) and roll your own.

>> b) use a tunnel broker - this works much better through NATs and with dynamic
>> IPv4 addresses
> 
> For which there is only experimental / ad-hoc code.  Please name
> CPE vendors that support tsp?  Please name CPE vendors that support
> tunnel re-configuration on re-number.

Jeroen has answered this, but I would point out, as an example of what can be done in short time, that I had a student last year who developed a mini-ITX Linux build with tunnel broker support, and IPv6 firewall and QoS support, using a web interface driving existing tools like iptables and tc.  He chose to use the HE broker, and it's a one-time registration after which it just works without further user intervention with HE.

It would be very interesting to see brokenness figures for well-known broker prefixes as against 6to4, if anyone is gathering such data.

>> c) use your $work VPN if it supports IPv6, which it could/should if your comp
>> any values IPv6
>> d) get IPv6 from your ISP, or move to one that has it if yours does not
> 
> Which is not always a viable option.

It is in the UK, at least.

Tim