On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 09:41 +0100, Wilfred van Velzen wrote:
On 2011-01-05 at 09:17, Hans Witvliet <hwit@a-domani.nl> wrote: In the mean time, use a tunnelbroker, while you can not get native-IPv6. I use HE (tunnelbroker.net, but there are others) in the mean time. My provider has started to give V6-addresses for those who want it, but i seriously think of sticking to my independant-tunnel-provider, instead of going native. My /48 is now independant of my isp,and i can switch to another isp without any re-numbering, Just adjusting my tunnel setup.
http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/12/06/the-trouble-with-6to4-2/ http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2010-12/6to4fail.html
I think you should allways choose native, if you have the choice.
And your also dependent on the bottleneck at the tunnel provider. Will they invest enough and on time in new equipment, when they become more widely used?
-- Well, instinctively i would agree: keep it as simpel as possible.
But performance is good: sometimes my latency is slightly (1 ms) higher. And horror stories like above (failure-rate) are completely unknown. Since HE has a end-point on the ams-ix, performance is that good, that i even recommended it at work. Furthermore, HE has 25 tunnel-endpoints at several major internet-router-sites (london, frankfurt, paris, singapore, hongkong), so you can avoid the single point of failure. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org