nanog mailing list archives

Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6)

From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 06:16:35 -1000

To me, the idea that the previous phase is over and we're in a new phase
is a positive statement, not a negative one.


being an engineer, i will judge by results.  but the track record is not
impressive.

randy

Current thread:

Fw: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Steven M. Bellovin (Sep 25)
- Re: Fw: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) bmanning (Sep 25)
  - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Fred Baker (Sep 26)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Randy Bush (Sep 26)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Steven M. Bellovin (Sep 26)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 26)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Jari Arkko (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Jari Arkko (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Randy Bush (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Fred Baker (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Randy Bush (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Fred Baker (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Randy Bush (Sep 27)
    - Re: WG Action: Conclusion of IP Version 6 (ipv6) Fred Baker (Sep 27)

(Thread continues...)