nanog mailing list archives
Re: Google Over IPV6
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 16:11:46 -0700
Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 27/03/2009 15:26, Leo Bicknell wrote:AFAIK you have to have native peering with them to be part of the pilot. At least, you did when we signed up. They may have relaxed that since.According to a Google IPv6 talk I attended yesterday, they don't intend to relax that rule. Tunneling ipv6 connectivity over ipv4 is trash quality engineering and to be honest, its not a credible substitute for adequate ipv6 infrastructure.
<facetious> Tunneling ipv4 over mpls is trash quality engineering and it's not a credible substitute for adequate ipv4 infrastructure. </facetious> Everything is a tunnel...
Nick
Current thread:
- Re: Google Over IPV6, (continued)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Daniel Verlouw (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Steven M. Bellovin (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Charles Wyble (Mar 27)
- RE: Google Over IPV6 Robert D. Scott (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Grzegorz Janoszka (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Rob Evans (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Leo Bicknell (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Nick Hilliard (Mar 27)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Joel Jaeggli (Mar 31)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Matthew Moyle-Croft (Mar 31)
- Re: Google Over IPV6 Bernhard Schmidt (Mar 28)