nanog mailing list archives
Re: DoD IP Space
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:02:48 -0800
On Jan 23, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Sabri Berisha <sabri () cluecentral net> wrote:
Personally, I would argue that a full implementation of IPv6 means that v4 could be phased out without adverse effect on the production network.
I like that definition.
Current thread:
- Re: DoD IP Space, (continued)
- Re: DoD IP Space Eric Kuhnke (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space Sabri Berisha (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space Owen DeLong (Feb 12)
- Re: DoD IP Space Owen DeLong (Feb 05)
- Re: DoD IP Space Fred Baker (Feb 09)
- Re: DoD IP Space William Herrin (Feb 10)
- Re: DoD IP Space Izaac (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space William Herrin (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space Izaac (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space William Herrin (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space Izaac (Feb 11)
- Re: DoD IP Space Mark Tinka (Feb 12)
- Re: DoD IP Space scott (Feb 13)
- RE: DoD IP Space Mark Foster (Feb 13)
- Re: DoD IP Space Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- Re: DoD IP Space Randy Bush (Feb 14)
- Re: DoD IP Space Mark Tinka (Feb 14)
- Re: DoD IP Space Sabri Berisha (Feb 14)
- Re: DoD IP Space Mark Tinka (Feb 14)