> => Cisco supported this but this was removed... Obviously 6to4 (a *different*
> thing) is far more popular (for bad reasons IMHO).
6to4 and 6over4 solve different problems; there's very little overlap in
their applicability. So if there is more interest in 6to4 than 6over4
it may be only a reflection that it is easier to upgrade a private intranet
to support native IPv6 (thus bypassing 6over4) than to upgrade the
public Internet to support native IPv6.
Keith
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
