er... if I may - this whining about the evils of tunnels rings a bit hollow, esp for those who think that a VPN is the right thing to do.
--bill On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 08:44:53AM +1000, Karl Auer wrote: > On Fri, 2010-05-14 at 14:57 -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > Tunnels promote poor paths > > "promote"? Tunnel topology does not (necessarily) match the underlying > topology, especially if you choose (or are forced to accept) a distant > broker. But "promote"? > > > , they bring along LOTS of issues wrt PMTUD, > > PMTUD that doesn't work on v6 probably doesn't work on v4. I agree that > a bad PMTU can wreak more havoc on v6 than v4, but most of the issues > are workaroundable. > > > asymmetry of paths, improper/inefficient paths (see example paths from > > several ripe preso's by jereon/others), longer latency. > > All relating to the above. I suspect you really mean paths in the > underlying topology, which is a "by definition" issue. None of these are > necessary features of tunnels. > > Given the relatively low number of tunnel terminating services, and the > fairly low level of choice available to people who want tunnels, these > are bigger problems than they need to be. More demand will see these > problems (as with so many transitional issues) lessen substantially. > > > If the tunnel > > exits your border you can't control what happens and you can't affect > > that tunnels performance characteristics. > > Whereas with IPv4 you have complete control over everything that happens > once packets exit your border? This is no different with IPv6 than with > IPv4, except that you have fewer choices at present, so must make more > drastic compromises. > > > it's 2010, get native v6. > > Easily said :-( > > If you can't get native IPv6, then using a tunnel lets you get started; > it lets you begin educating, testing and even delivering IPv6-based > services. If, on the other hand, you wait until everything is perfect, > you will be waaaay behind the eight-ball. > > Oh - and tunnels are usually way cheaper than native connectivity, so > it's easier to get the idea of going v6 past the bean-counters. > > So: Yep, native IPv6 if you can get it. Otherwise, take tunnels. But > whichever you do, do it now. > > Regards, K. > > -- > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Karl Auer (ka...@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) > http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) > > GPG fingerprint: B386 7819 B227 2961 8301 C5A9 2EBC 754B CD97 0156 > Old fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF
