Downloading over IPv6 is still almost always slower than over
IPv4, but for day-to-day stuff the performance difference
isn't an issue with native IPv6 connectivity (for me). 6to4
is a crapshoot, it can be reasonable or it can completely
fail, with everything in between.
That will improve as more people set up 6to4 relay services
http://www.getipv6.info/index.php/First_Steps_for_ISPs#Setup_A_6to4_Rela
y
But it's never going to be better than native IPv4, obviously.
Not so. Native IPv4 will route packets by choosing the best path.
Part of that path decision will be made via BGP which allows
network administrators to remove certain paths from the list
of possibilities. When a 6to4 relay is used, the destination
IPv4 address is that of the tunnel endpoint, not the final
destination. It is entirely possible that a tunnel endpoint
may take the packets into an AS which would not otherwise be
used and which IS a better path than would be chosen by pure
IPv4 routing. Back in the 1990s some shrewd American ISPs used
this fact to get free transit from certain ASNs because the
traffic to a tunnel endpoint qualified under the peering agreement.
--Michael Dillon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf