nanog mailing list archives

Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?

From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:54:23 +0200

Can we really push an IPv6 agenda for CDN's when IPv6 routing at high 
backend levels is still not complete?  I certainly don't have the 
'clout' to push that, but full routing between Cogent and HE needs to be 
fixed.


if you are worried about full v4 or v6 or v8-juice routing between
cogent and X, for many values of X, then you will never be unworried.

randy

Current thread:

Re: NAT444 or ?, (continued)
- - - Re: NAT444 or ? Seth Mos (Sep 07)
    - RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
    - Re: NAT444 or ? Dorn Hetzel (Sep 07)
    - Re: NAT444 or ? Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 07)
    - RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 07)
    - Re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 07)
    - RE: NAT444 or ? Leigh Porter (Sep 08)
    - RE: NAT444 or ? Cameron Byrne (Sep 08)
    - what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 08)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Lyle Giese (Sep 08)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Randy Bush (Sep 08)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Joel jaeggli (Sep 08)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Lyle Giese (Sep 08)
    - CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Jean-Francois . TremblayING (Sep 09)
    - Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Valdis . Kletnieks (Sep 09)
    - Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Alexander Harrowell (Sep 09)
    - Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 09)
    - Re: CGN and CDN (was Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?) Dobbins, Roland (Sep 09)
    - RE: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Dan Wing (Sep 08)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Christian de Larrinaga (Sep 09)
    - Re: what about the users re: NAT444 or ? Owen DeLong (Sep 13)

(Thread continues...)