nanog mailing list archives
Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted]
From: Donald Stahl <don () calis blacksun org>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 16:07:19 -0400 (EDT)
I guess we have different definitions for "most significant backbones". Unless you mean they have a dual-stack router running _somewhere_, say, for instance, at a single IX or a lab LAN or something. Which is not particularly useful if we are talking about a "significant backbone".
Rather than go back and forth- can we get some real data? Can anyone comment on the backbone IPv6 status of the major carriers? -Don
Current thread:
- RE: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted), (continued)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) bmanning (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Perry Lorier (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted John Curran (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Tony Hain (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Randy Bush (May 30)
- dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Patrick W. Gilmore (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Donald Stahl (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Merike Kaeo (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack simon (May 31)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Jared Mauch (May 30)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Tony Hain (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Mark Tinka (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Chris L. Morrow (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Valdis . Kletnieks (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Donald Stahl (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 29)