--- Tony Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Consider that the IETF > *could* conceivably > require every compliant v6 implementation to include > it. God Forbid. I somehow don't want my core routers deciding to speak shim6... David Barak Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise: http://www.listentothefranchise.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Payne) Iljitsch van Beijnum
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Pa... Kevin Day
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from John Pa... Daniel Golding
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Joe Abley
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Christian Kuhtz
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Joe Abley
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... John Payne
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Joe Abley
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Marshall Eubanks
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Tony Li
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... David Barak
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Stephen Sprunk
- absense of multicast deployment Joe Abley
- Re: absense of multicast deployment Marshall Eubanks
- Re: absense of multicast deployment John Kristoff
- Re: absense of multicast deployment Kurt Erik Lindqvist
- Re: absense of multicast deployment Stephen Sprunk
- Re: absense of multicast deployment Edward B. DREGER
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Kurt Erik Lindqvist
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: shim6 @ NANOG (forwarded note from Joh... Christian Kuhtz