our smtp server
tries to deliver through the firewall with its http server address, which
is then Not Allowed (tm) :)
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
Thus wrote Dan Wing (dw...@cisco.com):
> On Sep 4, 2013, at 4:43 AM, S.P.Zeidler wrote:
[...]
> >
> > In an IPv6 world, network services (aka, smtp, http, dns, .. servers)
> > should -always- be bound (and bindable) to specific addresses both for
> > incoming and outg
t it?
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
l declare RA
deprecated directly.
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
one Elses Problem
how to handle conflicting information if that way gets chosen.
I have the suspicion I would wind up being Someone Else in this case,
and would rather not be happy with the results :-P
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
be tested? are you familiar
with the term bitrot?
> It's not exactly someone elses problem as someone else don't need to
> do work if default gw is added to DHCPv6.
So you propose that the feature be added to the protocol and then no-one
should implement it?
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
Thus wrote Lorenzo Colitti (lore...@google.com):
> On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 4:10 PM, S.P.Zeidler wrote:
>
> > > Agreed this wasn't the best example but it's valid for two default
> > > gw's as well.
> >
> > ... not if your operating system will
as router address on all relevant VLANs?
What reason spoke against it?
You'll still have the "using wrong prefix to source packets" problem
though (which could be fixed using dhcpv6 if your equipment were inclined
to support it).
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
onic plague (let the router do both packet
fragmentation (wasn't that explicitly forbidden in IPv6?) and packet
reassembly)" idea?
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
ns for using the current Internet protocol (IPv6)."
will not point fingers at IPv6, but at IPv4.
Maybe in 2020 ...
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
quot;meh, it's there" choice, and does its job
reliably well enough, as do the other common open source MTAs.
Sendmail does have an advantage if/when you e.g. have uucp connections
or need to fold, spindle and mutilate mail headers in other exiting ways.
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
nd we run a
> CGN, it will not be possible / too expensive / ... to log the NAT
> mappings that the CGN did".
Also, expecting that politicians will let practical considerations get
in the way of their desires may be overly optimistic.
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
active), you would get a syntax error (no []: allowed in hostnames).
doing the occasional software necromancy for pay,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
t particularily
useful. Might as well just deploy v6 to the DMZ and save yourself
a lot of hassle if that is all you'll do.
Or were you just ignoring software as Someone Elses Problem (tm)? :)
regards,
spz
(currently doing devops for a manufactorer with ~5000 Unix servers running
the plants as a dayjob)
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
er".
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
yment and
progress to itojun
I make a short presentation about itojun
on
http://v6reporttoitojun.jp/index.html.en
please give me comments about itojun.
--
Jun Ebihara
- End forwarded message -
regards,
spz
--
s...@serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)
16 matches
Mail list logo
