Hi Mark,
On 2010-08-03 15:13, Mark Andrews wrote:
> In message <4c573194.5040...@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
>> On 2010-08-03 01:52, Etienne Gallet de Santerre wrote:
>>> Hi Brian,
>>>
>>> I am a PhD student working on home networking, and especially on
>>> multihoming.
>>>
>>> I agree O
Brian,
On 2010/07/31, at 6:16, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry I was not in Maastricht and able to attend.
>
> Technically, it's very interesting, and is (as far as I am
> concerned) the original plan for IPv6 multihoming, as we expected
> ten years ago.
>
> But there's a problem. As
Brian E Carpenter writes:
> (That's assuming I believe that SOHO users will have multiple ISPs; I
> have my doubts about that, but never mind.)
Lots of them already do. ADSL + 3G. However, the 3G is usually connected
to each individual PC and the ADSL to the Wifi router, so right now
people just
In message <4c573194.5040...@gmail.com>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
> On 2010-08-03 01:52, Etienne Gallet de Santerre wrote:
> > Hi Brian,
> >
> > I am a PhD student working on home networking, and especially on
> > multihoming.
> >
> > I agree Ole and think that multihoming will be no longer the
On 2010-08-03 01:52, Etienne Gallet de Santerre wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> I am a PhD student working on home networking, and especially on
> multihoming.
>
> I agree Ole and think that multihoming will be no longer the privilege
> of industries, but will be available to home networks too.
>
> As a
Hi Brian,
I am a PhD student working on home networking, and especially on
multihoming.
I agree Ole and think that multihoming will be no longer the privilege
of industries, but will be available to home networks too.
As a home network is not be managed by an administrator in most cases,
t
..@employees.org]
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 1:52 PM
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: IPv6 Mailing List WG
Subject: Re: bar-bof Multihoming with multiple prefixes without NAT66
Brian,
> Sorry I was not in Maastricht and able to attend.
>
> Technically, it's very interesting, and is (as f
Brian,
> Sorry I was not in Maastricht and able to attend.
>
> Technically, it's very interesting, and is (as far as I am
> concerned) the original plan for IPv6 multihoming, as we expected
> ten years ago.
>
> But there's a problem. As far as I can tell from formal and
> informal contacts with
Hi,
Sorry I was not in Maastricht and able to attend.
Technically, it's very interesting, and is (as far as I am
concerned) the original plan for IPv6 multihoming, as we expected
ten years ago.
But there's a problem. As far as I can tell from formal and
informal contacts with IT management in ty
All,
at yesterday's bof, we had a lot of participants and good
discussion. I'd like to say thank you here again.
At the following site, you can find the presentation slides
of yesterday the internet-drafts, and some related documents from BBF.
Though the source code is not made public yet, we are
All,
the place and time is fixed for the bar-bof.
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki/BarBofsIETF78
We welcome everyone to drop by.
20:00-21:30
Multihoming with multiple prefixes without NAT66 : Implementation of
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-troan-multihoming-without-nat66. Live
d
11 matches
Mail list logo
