Indeed

Marketing services or products to be on productization level, it's commonly
considered that bad product is worse than no product at all. Worst thing to
have is unpredictable and unreliable service. And as IPv6 now slowly starts
to be available for many data centers, I just can't see justification for
running tunneled services anymore.

MPLS is a whole another story, let's not get into that here. But having
tunnels already in place doesn't really mean that we should intentionally
have more.

--
Markku Miettinen 



-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] Puolesta Rainer May
Lähetetty: 22. kesäkuuta 2012 9:06
Kopio: [email protected]
Aihe: Re: [Pool] packet loss in IPv6 monitoring?

[email protected] schrieb:
>
>
> So in principal I wouldn't run any services on any tunneled 
> connections. In most of the cases you don't see anything, but chances 
> of having trouble are much larger than with native connectivity.
>

Totally good idea. So you're going to trade the chance of failure for the
guarantee of failure (due to the fact of no / much less servers).

And, BTW, if you could see the way even IPv4 packets are going, the parts
you can't due to MPLS tunneling and such, you'd probably think that the the
situation you described - quite correctly - is the least of your concern.

R.

_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

Reply via email to