nanog mailing list archives
Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:54:23 +0200
Can we really push an IPv6 agenda for CDN's when IPv6 routing at high backend levels is still not complete? I certainly don't have the 'clout' to push that, but full routing between Cogent and HE needs to be fixed.
if you are worried about full v4 or v6 or v8-juice routing between cogent and X, for many values of X, then you will never be unworried. randy
Current thread:
- Re: NAT444 or ?, (continued)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Seth Mos (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Dorn Hetzel (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
- Re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 07)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 08)
- RE: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 08)
- what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 08)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Lyle Giese (Sep 08)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Randy Bush (Sep 08)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Joel jaeggli (Sep 08)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Lyle Giese (Sep 08)
- CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Jean-Francois . TremblayING (Sep 09)
- Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 09)
- Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Alexander Harrowell (Sep 09)
- Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 09)
- Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
- RE: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 09)
- Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 13)