[ppml] IPv6 flawed?

I see your point.  Nanog would be good.  But the discussion can lead to policy needs and creations.

So I kinda see it as the chicken and the egg problem.

Maybe the arin discuss site would be better.  But are all members subscribed to that like they are ppml?

Marla

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
Randy Bush
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2007 3:48 PM
To: David Conrad
Cc: Public Policy Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ppml] IPv6 flawed?


>> what is critical to ipv6 deployment is vendor support, vendor support,
>> and did i mention vendor support; from the core to the edge.  with
>> nat-pt + algs for dns, http, smtp, and sip.  otherwise the cost to move
>> to v6 is bigger than v4 nat; end of game.
>> but this is not really the list for this.
> Serious question: what's the right list?

my assertion that this was the wrong one is because it's not address
allocation/management policy.

nanog would be fun :)

or reality6 at psg.com

randy
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy
Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services
Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.