RFC 5569: IPv6 Rapid Deployment on IPv4 Infrastructures (6rd)
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
IPv6 rapid deployment on IPv4 infrastructures (6rd) builds upon mechanisms of 6to4 to enable a service provider to rapidly deploy IPv6 unicast service to IPv4 sites to which it provides customer premise equipment. Like 6to4, it utilizes stateless IPv6 in IPv4 encapsulation in order to transit IPv4-only network infrastructure. Unlike 6to4, a 6rd service provider uses an IPv6 prefix of its own in place of the fixed 6to4 prefix. A service provider has used this mechanism for its own IPv6 "rapid deployment": five weeks from first exposure to 6rd principles to more than 1,500,000 residential sites being provided native IPv6, under the only condition that they activate it. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5569
- Published
- January 2010
- Authors
- R. Despres
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- INDEPENDENT
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 10
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 7341DHCPv4-over-DHCPv6 (DHCP 4o6) TransportCurrent
August 2014
- RFC 7600IPv4 Residual Deployment via IPv6 - A Stateless Solution (4rd)Current
July 2015
- RFC 5572IPv6 Tunnel Broker with the Tunnel Setup Protocol (TSP)Current
February 2010
- RFC 5579Transmission of IPv4 Packets over Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP) InterfacesCurrent
February 2010
- RFC 5214Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP)Current
March 2008
- RFC 6964Operational Guidance for IPv6 Deployment in IPv4 Sites Using the Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP)Current
May 2013
- RFC 7021Assessing the Impact of Carrier-Grade NAT on Network ApplicationsCurrent
September 2013
- RFC 3974SMTP Operational Experience in Mixed IPv4/v6 EnvironmentsCurrent
January 2005
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?