It has been my experience that ASN.1, no matter which encoding rules are
used, has proven to be a failure and lingering interoperability and
denial-of-service disaster.
I think the nugget of our discussion is the old, and probably
unanswerable, question of what is the proper balance
i get an unknown host with ping6 www.ietf.org
try ping
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Randy Bush wrote:
i get an unknown host with ping6 www.ietf.org
try ping
well right all that works Randy. i can ping6 6bone.net all day long too,
via 6in4 encapsulation. 62 hops away. not a problem. so this server has
a route to the 6-bone. and i'm in the third
unless there is a reason why that host should not be using v6
services, hmm?
because it works now?
v6 has one salient feature, more address space. religious selling
does not help the case for v6. make it work simply and directly,
not through 42 hacks. get router, dsl, ... vendors to support
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003, Randy Bush wrote:
unless there is a reason why that host should not be using v6
services, hmm?
because it works now?
not unless we are waiting for a zone refresh.
; DiG 9.2.2 @partybus ietf.org
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode:
So here's the nightmare scenario: X.693 (XER - XML Encoding Rules for ASN.1).
You get the best of ASN.1 and XML -- undecipherable ASCII text with lots of angle
brackets :-)
-Original Message-
From: Karl Auerbach [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sun, August 24, 2003 9:12 PM
To: Dean
At 19:03 -0700 8/23/03, Karl Auerbach wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003, Dean Anderson wrote:
H.323 and ASN.1 eventually surpass ...
Ummm, based on my own direct experience with ASN.1 since the mid 1980's
(X.400, SNMP, CMIP...), I disagree.
It has been my experience that ASN.1, no matter which encoding
Randy Bush wrote:
...
v6 has one salient feature, more address space. religious
selling does not help the case for v6.
I don't think making a server accessable over IPv6 is religious selling.
Some might even consider it 'running code', ... or don't we believe in that
anymore?
make it
On maandag, aug 25, 2003, at 10:15 Europe/Amsterdam, Randy Bush wrote:
unless there is a reason why that host should not be using v6
services, hmm?
because it works now?
But for some boxes only if I use NAT, and having to use NAT makes for a
liberal definition of works.
v6 has one salient
On Thursday, August 21, 2003, at 04:00 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
Are not service providers and network
managers the people supposed to bring these services into operation?
I certainly don't share that assumption. Then again, I don't share the
assumption that any central coordinating authority is
10 matches
Mail list logo
