[ppml] IPv6 flawed?
marla.azinger at frontiercorp.com
Mon Sep 17 18:56:36 EDT 2007
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?
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
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
nanog would be fun :)
or reality6 at psg.com
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.
More information about the ARIN-PPML