I'm looking forward to the awful experience of NAT444 promoting IPv6.
-- Leigh Porter On 15 Sep 2011, at 00:37, "Mark Gauvin" <mgau...@dryden.ca> wrote: > Nat444 or frontal labotomy hmm let's see at least with the second I > would still be able to make a living as a micro soft network admin;) > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2011-09-14, at 6:07 PM, "James Jones" <ja...@freedomnet.co.nz> wrote: > >> On 9/14/11 2:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote: >>> In a message written on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 09:24:25AM +1200, Don >>> Gould wrote: >>>> How many of you have sat and thought about the merit of this web >>>> site? >>> Ok, I'll take a swing at your list... >>> >>>> * Does Juniper break promises? >>> Yes. >>> >>>> * Does Cisco break them? >>> Yes. >>> >>>> * What bad things and experiences have you had with Cisco, Juniper? >>> It might take me several days, and many pages to compile that list. >>> >>>> * What is the best technology for each company? >>> Cisco: The AGS+ was ahead of its time. >>> Jiniper: The Olive is quite nifty. >>> >>>> * Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution? >>> Yes, but I can't afford it. >>> >>> Now, with that out of the way, how much does everyone else hate >>> even the >>> thought of NAT444? >>> >>> :) :) :) >>> >> >> Just the thought of NAT444 makes my stomach turn. >> >> >> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. > For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email > ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________