Dave,
I have been to China for two weeks just now. my views on any sharing at all
have become a lot dimmer, recently.
You never know what into this might leak to whom. State, corporate or
private.
Richard
Sent by mobile; excuse my brevity.
What right do you have to know what your users are doing?
What right does Google have to hand over their information to a third party
(you)?
Richard
Sent by mobile; excuse my brevity.
You are right, it can not be Google's responsibility to fix other networks.
That being said, given initial and then monthly warnings, including a link
to a FAQ, from noreply@ to whois contacts, you would most likely help
increase IPv6 adoption.
Richard
Sent by mobile; excuse my brevity.
+1!
Some more info on metrics, cutoff points, etc would help reduce FUD, but I
can't see your reaction to my problems on my network breaks my CGN setup
being a very valid argument either way.
It _would_ be interesting to know if Google would do the inverse in case
IPv4 performs badly and IPv6
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Steinar H. Gunderson se...@google.com wrote:
On the contrary, it gives you a great single point to log everything.
I'm sure PST will be thrilled.
Plus, too expensive is only a problem for the carriers, not for the vendors.
Adding a way to dump the state of the
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Tore Anderson t...@fud.no wrote:
How to introduce it to existing customers, you might ask? Maybe just
ask them? Send an SMS saying 20% off your next bill if you give up your
IPv4 address (and enable IPv6?), pointing out it's not binding and can
be re-enabled at
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Tore Anderson t...@fud.no wrote:
As Erik mentions, lowering the TCP MSS will likely work around the
problem. You can probably do this by having the RAs your router emits to
the LAN advertise an MTU of 1452 to match your tunnel (which in turn
should make your
