On 15 Oct, Jeroen Massar wrote:
| -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
|
| [aggregated mail :)]
|
| Mohsen Souissi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| > On 15 Oct, Jeroen Massar wrote:
|
|
| > | Apparently there is work being done on this, but it is not very public.
| >
| > ==> AFNIC (French R
rule for the WG.
Thanks
/jim
-Original Message-
From: Mans Nilsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:33 AM
To: Mark Smith
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is
good enough ?
Subject: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
[aggregated mail :)]
Mohsen Souissi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 15 Oct, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> | Apparently there is work being done on this, but it is not very public.
>
> ==> AFNIC (French Registry) has been running an official IPv6-capable
> nam
hanks
/jim
> -Original Message-
> From: Mans Nilsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 11:33 AM
> To: Mark Smith
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is
> good enough ?
>
>
> Subject: Will
Dear Mr Py,
Sorry, could you run that past me one more time ..?
J
On Tue, 14 Oct 2003, Michel Py wrote:
> Mark,
>
> > Mark Smith wrote:
> > a) Is IPv4 going to be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good
> > enough? If so, are the related IPv4 NAT RFCs also going to be
> > deprecated
On 15 Oct, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[...]
|
| > That's all protocol stuff. Hopefully all of
| > this can be fixed in the not too distant future. But there there is
| > another extremely important issue that (in my not so humble opinion)
| > must absolutely be fixed before making any such statement:
> Client access and for some also hosting is taken care of by
> using tunnelbrokers and other transition mechanisms. ISP's
> should start enabling IPv6 on their native networks where
> possible and start providing servers with IPv6 connectivity.
> Then it is at least possible for clients to use it.
--On Wednesday, October 15, 2003 14:55:58 +0300 Pekka Savola
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Failed to produce a multihoming solution for smaller enterprises which
> would not need an AS number otherwise, but whose about only (clear) option
> is to go and get an AS number for their site multihoming
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003, Måns Nilsson wrote:
[...]
> > There are now less than 35000 free AS numbers. If such a policy would be
> > adopted there would be a huge land rush, depleting the AS number supply
> > and forever polluting the IPv6 routing table with 64000 or so routes,
> > most of which don't n
--On Wednesday, October 15, 2003 12:10:39 +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A very good property of IPv6 is that we get to avoid some of the mistakes
> that were made with IPv4. One of those mistakes was giving out addresses
> in ways that didn't scale. History teaches us t
On 14 okt 2003, at 17:32, Mans Nilsson wrote:
b) Is IPv6 good enough yet ?
I think so. There are valid concerns on two things; multihoming and
address allocation procedures. There seems to be strong forces among
the
researchers and vendors advocting that we halt and wait for the
Grail of multiho
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 14 okt 2003, at 16:13, Mark Smith wrote:
>
> > A little later, it occured to me that maybe what the market might be
> > missing is a statement from the IETF, IESG and/or IAB, that IPv6 is
> > now *ready*, and can be deployed i
On 14 okt 2003, at 16:13, Mark Smith wrote:
A little later, it occured to me that maybe what the market might be
missing is a statement from the IETF, IESG and/or IAB, that IPv6 is
now *ready*, and can be deployed in production via the available
transition mechanisms, slowly replacing IPv4 (+ N
My 2 (euro-)cents:
> That brings to my mind two questions
>
> a) Is IPv4 going to be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough?
No.
> If so, are the related IPv4 NAT RFCs also going to be deprecated at that
> time ?
No.
> b) Is IPv6 good enough yet ?
No. Still a lot of work to be done.
At 07:13 AM 10/14/2003, Mark Smith wrote:
A little later, it occured to me that maybe what the market might be
missing is a statement from the IETF, IESG and/or IAB, that IPv6 is now
*ready*, and can be deployed in production via the available transition
mechanisms, slowly replacing IPv4 (+ NAT)
Mark,
> Mark Smith wrote:
> a) Is IPv4 going to be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good
> enough? If so, are the related IPv4 NAT RFCs also going to be
> deprecated at that time ?
IMHO it's not a matter of being good enough, it's a matter of how many
IPv4 hosts are still up. The IETF deprecating
Subject: Will IPv4 be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough ? Date: Tue, Oct
14, 2003 at 11:43:36PM +0930 Quoting Mark Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> That brings to my mind two questions
>
> a) Is IPv4 going to be formally deprecated when IPv6 is good enough? If so, are the
> related IPv4 N
17 matches
Mail list logo
