joshua sahala wrote:
Sure they could play the 6-to-4 game, but that just highlights one problem with v6: there no effective migration path from v4 to v6... Besides, 6-to-4 looks a lot like NAT, and it is almost universally agreed that NAT is teh suck
Wait, what? I'm not sure that 6to4 is a lot like v4 NAT at all, which shares a single public address among many privately addressed machines. (by public and private, I don't mean RFC1918, necessarily) Instead, it gives you a way to get an IPv6 /48 per IPv4 public (in the RFC1918 sense) address, and a tunneling mechanism to get that host's v6 traffic to the `6-bone' and back. No hiding of your public v6 address takes place. If your router supports it, you can give each of your internal machines a 6to4 address. An effective migration path might be: 1) Get a v6 border+transit and/or a v6 capable Linux box+tunnels. 1.5) Don't forget to get to Citylink somehow. 2) Get your customers (who want them) v6 routers and configs. 3) Serve up a 6to4 relay to your customers, and have them configure their routers to use it. 3.5) Consider doing static tunnels with your publicly allocated IPv6 space from [RIR]. 4) When your access network can do v6, and you've got it all tested etc. turn it on, and if you didn't assign numbers in step 3.5, do so. 5) Profit (may not be applicable, but it always seems to come at the end of these type of lists) You can do steps 1-3 in less than a day, even a few hours. It doesn't require any knowledge of v6 really, you just need some tunnels to send IPv6 traffic out over (other 6to4 routers will be used for the return path, of course, it'll look just like IPv4:41 traffic to you). -- Nathan Ward