nanog mailing list archives
Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64
From: Daniel Roesen <dr () cluenet de>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 09:14:25 +0200
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:29:47AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
DS-lite and NAT444 don't break existing applications.
They do, to different degrees. There is plenty of evidence for that.
Each solution fits well for some set of constraints and objectives
Pick your poison. :-) Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr () cluenet de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
Current thread:
- Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Aleksi Suhonen (Jun 08)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Mark Andrews (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Cameron Byrne (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Jeff Hartley (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Martin Millnert (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Daniel Roesen (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Jeff Hartley (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Daniel Roesen (Jun 10)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Cameron Byrne (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Mark Andrews (Jun 09)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Daniel Roesen (Jun 10)
- Re: Quick comparison of LSNs and NAT64 Mark Andrews (Jun 09)