nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 news
From: "Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow () mci com>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 03:27:45 +0000 (GMT)
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005, Mike Leber wrote:
Right now the evangelists of IPv6 are like "suck it up man". We're providing the service, however you've set the expectation in the market that the value of IPv6 in addition to IPv4 is zero. If IPv6 was perceived to have any premimum value (non zero) over IPv4, it would fix most all the network build comments that you keep slapping down.
and you are showing that the cost to do v6 is non-zero... so that should help.
Current thread:
- Re: Deploying 6to4 outbound routes at the border, (continued)
- Re: Deploying 6to4 outbound routes at the border Todd Vierling (Oct 16)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 17)
- Re: 6to4 gateways Perry Lorier (Oct 17)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael Greb (Oct 13)
- RE: IPv6 news K. Scott Bethke (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Mike Leber (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Sam Hayes Merritt, III (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Mike Leber (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Christopher L. Morrow (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Stephen Sprunk (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Mike Leber (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael Greb (Oct 14)
- Re: IPv6 news JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (Oct 15)
- Re: IPv6 news David Conrad (Oct 15)
- Re: IPv6 news Steven M. Bellovin (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Randy Bush (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Brandon Ross (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 news Michael . Dillon (Oct 13)