nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 woes - RFC
From: Niels Bakker <niels=nanog () bakker net>
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2021 18:48:27 +0200
* bjorn () mork no (Bjørn Mork) [Sun 05 Sep 2021, 18:24 CEST]:
So where does that put us in a decade or two? Which protocol is optional?
The one that costs money. You can already see this in mobile networks.
-- Niels.
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 04)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Aaron C. de Bruyn via NANOG (Sep 04)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Brian Knight via NANOG (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Niels Bakker (Sep 04)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Saku Ytti (Sep 04)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Grant Taylor via NANOG (Sep 04)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Bjørn Mork (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Niels Bakker (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Saku Ytti (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Xavier Beaudouin via NANOG (Sep 05)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Matt Palmer (Sep 06)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Randy Bush (Sep 06)
- Re: IPv6 woes - RFC Mark Tinka (Sep 06)