nanog mailing list archives
Re: Real World NAT64 deployments
From: Leo Bicknell <bicknell () ufp org>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 18:03:26 -0800
In a message written on Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 08:27:18PM -0500, TJ wrote:
And 6to4 doesn't allow IPv6 to talk to IPv4, contrary to what the name seems to imply :). Some poorly chosen names for our tunneling, yes?
I think 6automaticallyover4 was determined to be too long. :P -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
Current thread:
- RE: Real World NAT64 deployments, (continued)
- RE: Real World NAT64 deployments George Bonser (Mar 03)
- RE: Real World NAT64 deployments George Bonser (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Elliot Finley (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Tom Hill (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Elliot Finley (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Simon Perreault (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Francois Tigeot (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Simon Perreault (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Bjoern A. Zeeb (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Francois Tigeot (Mar 04)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments MAWATARI Masataka (Mar 07)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments TJ (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Leo Bicknell (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Karl Auer (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments Owen DeLong (Mar 03)
- Re: Real World NAT64 deployments TJ (Mar 04)