3 Oct
2017
3 Oct
'17
1:46 a.m.
At the cost of sacificing the independence and
survivability of the
mesh structure that is the current AMPRNet, one or more central v4 to
v6 gateways could be established. I believe it would be too much to
expect each of the 600 or so subnet gateways to become "dual-stacked".
I will certainly consider adding IPv4-over-IPv6 tunneling to our gateway for
44.137.0.0/16
when there is demand for it. We are already IPv6-connected but at the moment this is
only used for out-of-band management (to prevent locking myself out of the system when
doing work on the complicated IPv4 routing and firewall)
Of course that would indeed mean it is not meshed over IPv6 but of course it still
participates in the IPv4 mesh.
When there is sufficient uptake in other parts of the world, additional meshing over
IPv6 could be considered. I agree that some method, preferably an internet standard,
should be used to disseminate IPv6 tunnel information. It would decrease the difficulty
of adding a gateway for those that e.g. want to use surplus commercial routers.
Rob