[arin-ppml] Name and Shame in public - was Re: ARIN-prop-133: No Volunteer Services on Behalf of Unaffiliated Address Blocks - revised
I do not consider that they are planning on it in Q3 to be a "name and
A "name and shame" would be if a vendor had NO plans on supporting IPv6
at this time.
After all I doubt any RIR will be out of IPv4 by the end of 2011.
Getting IPv6 out by then is cutting it close - but arguably the CPE
market isn't going to be IPv6 ready by 2012 anyway so what good is a
Redback or a cable head that's IPv6-compliant when none of the CPE's
can talk to it?
On 2/20/2011 5:53 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
> I really don't like to "name and shame" in public. If it's a feature
> gap/snafu I don't mind point it out.
> Another service provider already did the naming for us, though -- just go to
> Comcast's IPv6 blog and you'll figure it out.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Kaufman [mailto:matthew at matthew.at]
> Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2011 7:47 PM
> To: frnkblk at iname.com
> Cc: 'George Bonser'; Owen DeLong; Jeffrey Lyon; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-133: No Volunteer Services on Behalf of
> Unaffiliated Address Blocks - revised
> On 2/20/2011 4:11 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> Yes -- without naming names, one of the three leading CMTS vendors has no
>> IPv6 support (Q3 at the earliest).
> And how could not naming names benefit anyone in this discussion?
> Matthew Kaufman
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.