js33
join:2007-03-10
Vancouver, WA
| reply to justbits
Re: Tunnel Broker Bandwidth
No such luck. I was the one that posted that impressive traceroute in the other topic. My ISP uses Cogentco as their sole upstream provider (which is why they're not going to be my ISP much longer).
I live out in the hills, miles from the CO, with at least one DSL repeater on the line, and marginal quality at that. Ping on our DSL circuit alone (to the immediate gateway) has been terrible, averaging 80-100 milliseconds. The first ping (or initial connection) anywhere but google, even to our immediate gateway, takes about an additional 30ms. Somehow google is routed without this initial delay.
CogentCo is a horrible tarpit. They add anywhere from 10 ms latency for google to >150 ms for anywhere else. There's no such thing as network neutrality. Google is the only internet site I can get 200 ms response time.
But more on topic, does anybody offer decent 6to4 bandwidth? This is what I really want to know before I go too much further. Does anyone currently have a 6to4 tunnel of any kind with decent bandwidth? If you have a 6to4 tunnel or are using the relay address, what is your bandwidth for v6 traffic? (I have 1.5Mbit down / 768kbit up, and usually have no trouble maxing that out in IPv4, just to give you an idea of the speed I am looking for.) |
|
justbits
More fiber than ATT can handle
Premium
join:2003-01-08
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T Yahoo
| 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. |
|
