> Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 09:36:28 +1300 (FJST) > From: Franck Martin <fra...@genius.com> > > I use HE.NET in a few installations (with BGP) and they have good support > (which is quite awesome for a free service). > > As people pointed out avoid 6to4, Apple just rendered it nearly useless in > its latest OS-X. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeroen van Aart" <jer...@mompl.net> > To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Saturday, 20 November, 2010 9:07:53 AM > Subject: Re: IPv6 6to4 and dns > > Mark Andrews wrote: > > Firstly I would use a tunnel broker instead of 6to4. Easier to > > debug failures. > > Thanks all for the helpful response. Using the same names for IPv6 and > IPv4 doesn't appear to be much of a problem, especially considering this > is a trial which concerns office/home ISP connectivity, for now. > > Which IPv6 tunnel broker is preferable, or does it really matter?
I'm afraid that announcements of 2002::/16 by places with non-functional or poorly connected 6to4 had already rendered it close enough to useless that I quit caring. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: ober...@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
