justbits
More fiber than ATT can handle
Premium
join:2003-01-08
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T Yahoo
| reply to js33
Re: Tunnel Broker Bandwidth
Maybe what we need is for someone to come up with an RFC for dynamically routing an IPv6 network over an IPv4 network by using a centralized or decentralized IPv4 P2P server, kinda like P2P programs do.
Instead of leaving the implementation of IPv6 routing to the network backbones and ISPs, maybe someone should figure out a way to route IPv6 over existing IPv4 networks by dynamically finding IPv6 to IPv4 relaying peers or locating them through a central (or decentralized) routing server (supernodes/superpeers). It's more likely that a community involved effort to route IPv6 will get IPv6 deployed quicker than relying on ISPs to upgrade or enhance their current infrastructure.
Maybe I should patent this idea?  |
|
js33
join:2007-03-10
Vancouver, WA
| I don't think it would really be that hard. The barriers are actually more political than technical. We do not even need to get an IPv6 address allocation from IANA initially. Routes and tunnel endpoints could be distributed either by a p2p network or centrally. Our community routing system would dynamically create tunnels where they are needed in order to take advantage of existing v4 topology. I believe anyone with a /48 from one tunnel provider can publish other routes to it with rtadvd through any other tunnel or path.
I did that once. I got a /48 from freenet6 and used a tunnel from he.net to actually route the traffic (he.net allowed much more bandwidth in those days.) he.net routed traffic to my freenet6 /48 no problem.
So, all each of us needs to do is get a /48 (from any tunnel provider), and set up a 6to4 relay on a public IPv4 address just for our /48, and somehow tell others how to reach our relay. |
|
