On 2011-07-23 17:44 , Paul Ebersman wrote:
>
> ryan> We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just
> ryan> confirmed today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
> [...]
> ryan> Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require
> ryan> IPv4
>
> It's a hack (but al
ryan> We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just
ryan> confirmed today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
[...]
ryan> Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require
ryan> IPv4
It's a hack (but all ipv6 transition stuff is...) but have you tried
using ipv
Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require IPv4
Cheers
Ryan
-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 12:34 AM
To: Ryan Finnesey
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: best practices for management nets in IPv6
Which
g.org
Subject: RE: best practices for management nets in IPv6
We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just confirmed
today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
Cheers
Ryan
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@dougbarton.us]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 4:59
: best practices for management nets in IPv6
On 07/18/2011 06:12, Tim Franklin wrote:
>> You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
>> see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
>> default.
>
> In the context of "addresses I&#
On 07/18/2011 06:12, Tim Franklin wrote:
>> You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
>> see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
>> default.
>
> In the context of "addresses I'm using to manage kit", having devices
> randomly renumber themselves at
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 13:12, Tim Franklin wrote:
>> You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
>> see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
>> default.
>
> In the context of "addresses I'm using to manage kit", having devices
> randomly renumber them
> You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
> see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
> default.
In the context of "addresses I'm using to manage kit", having devices randomly
renumber themselves at regular intervals does *not* sound like it's goin
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:22 PM, James Harr wrote:
> If you really really need address obfuscation, you can still do NAT,
> but NAT from public addresses to public a public address or pool of
Well,
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see rfc4941. For Linux, you ca
Maslak
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: best practices for management nets in IPv6
I couldn't agree more. If you set up private address space, it's going to come
back and make more work for you later. Set up public IPv6 addresses. If you
need stateful connection filtering, put in a statefu
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Tom Ammon wrote:
> On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
> approach for addressing them? Do you use ULA? Or do you use global addresses
> and just depend on router ACLs to protect things? How close are we to having
> a central
I couldn't agree more. If you set up private address space, it's going
to come back and make more work for you later. Set up public IPv6
addresses. If you need stateful connection filtering, put in a
stateful firewall.
If you really really need address obfuscation, you can still do NAT,
but NAT fr
Public IPs.
At some point you will have to manage something outside your current world or
your organization will need to merge/partner/outsource/contract/etc with
someone else's network and they might not be keen to route to your ULA space
(and might not be more trustworthy than the internet at
On Jul 12, 2011 2:33 PM, "Tom Ammon" wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our
operation, and I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
>
> On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
approach for addres
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Tom Ammon wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our operation,
> and I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
>
> On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
> approach
Hi All,
We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our operation, and
I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
approach for addressing them? Do you use ULA? Or do you use global ad
16 matches
Mail list logo
