nanog mailing list archives
Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion
From: "Petri Helenius" <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 23:08:34 +0300
Yes, it's an gradual trend. We are seeing and increase over time in active tunnels and in average traffic per tunnel.
Two easy things to drive v6 traffic: 1) switch your NNTP feeds to ipv6 2) put names which resolve to ipv6 addresses in your MX´s Both of these have little or no operational hazard. (SMTP fails over to v4 gracefully) Pete
Current thread:
- Broadening the IPv6 discussion Irwin Lazar (Aug 29)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Daniel Golding (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Stephen Sprunk (Aug 29)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Dave Israel (Aug 29)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Mike Leber (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Petri Helenius (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Kurtis Lindqvist (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Petri Helenius (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Kevin Oberman (Aug 29)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Kurtis Lindqvist (Aug 30)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Petri Helenius (Aug 30)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 30)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Jeroen Massar (Aug 30)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Iljitsch van Beijnum (Aug 30)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Jeroen Massar (Aug 30)
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Petri Helenius (Aug 29)
- RE: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Daniel Golding (Aug 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Broadening the IPv6 discussion Petri Helenius (Aug 30)