Maybe .. But i do not spend money nor time to do some "missionary work" for
what reason ever there is when stuff doesn't work. I've done it for years with
spammer friendly hoster which even see the abuse box is a Spam trap, and all
the so called number one hoster which never take care about
> Unfortunately the people who misconfigure do not read RFCs, if they did,
> they would not filter.
>
> They do not read this list either, let alone other resources that they
> should be reading. Hence... not something one can solve.
BUT: If you find such a person, you can strongly urge them to
On 2016-09-20 19:40, Gregor Riepl wrote:
>> That does not make IPv6 broken though, that makes people who think they
>> have to filter the wrong things broken.
>>
>> Misconfigurations is not something a protocol can solve.
>
> There's an RFC for that: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4890.txt
> Great
> That does not make IPv6 broken though, that makes people who think they
> have to filter the wrong things broken.
>
> Misconfigurations is not something a protocol can solve.
There's an RFC for that: https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4890.txt
Great document, even serves as a good primer for folks
Well the point wasn't a personal purchase point.
But taking the viewpoint of "someone" who may be deploying / deciding on
the deployment of IPv6 in the enterprise, BYOD, etc environments.
With one in two SmartPhones in CH Android, the advice of telling 50% of
your customers / users to "go
On 2016-09-20 15:58, Jim Romaguera wrote:
>
> On 20.09.2016 15:40, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>
Anybody has a proper excuse? :)
>
> No I don't have an excuse but interested in the communities (& your)
> opinion re your challenge...
>
> o DHCPv6 re Android re enterprise, BYOD, PWLAN, etc
On 20.09.2016 15:40, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Anybody has a proper excuse? :)
No I don't have an excuse but interested in the communities (& your)
opinion re your challenge...
o DHCPv6 re Android re enterprise, BYOD, PWLAN, etc environments
Is a problem or was a problem / no problem at all?
On 2016-09-20 15:29, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:20:56PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> On 2016-09-20 14:56, René Gallati wrote:
>> [..]
>>> I've activate IPv6 in my home network in 2011
>>
>> 2011, thus 5 years after 6bone had shut down and 12 years after RIR
>>
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 03:20:56PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2016-09-20 14:56, René Gallati wrote:
> [..]
> > I've activate IPv6 in my home network in 2011
>
> 2011, thus 5 years after 6bone had shut down and 12 years after RIR
> space has been available. Welcome to IPv6! ;)
>
> /me
On 20.09.2016 13:00, Roger Schmid wrote:
Just one .. Dropping MTU handling and point to layer7 should handle that
doesnt let you feel strange ? So how could an app handle packet size
thru L4 ?
Uh what now? In IPv4 you have the DF don't fragment bit in the IP
header, if set and exceeds a
Thats why i mentuoned to train techis and your argunent was its a management
problem :)
About mandatory how come then
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_MTU_Discovery .. Sorry to point to
Wikipedia .. But been on cell only i dont have the proper doc at hand
Em 20 de setembro de 2016
On 2016-09-20 13:00, Roger Schmid wrote:
> Just one .. Dropping MTU handling and point to layer7 should handle that
> doesnt let you feel strange ? So how could an app handle packet size
> thru L4 ?
Both IPv4 and IPv6 have this little protocol called ICMP (+ICMPv6) it is
very useful and for IPv6
Just one .. Dropping MTU handling and point to layer7 should handle that doesnt
let you feel strange ? So how could an app handle packet size thru L4 ?
My experience is soma pages ar crawling like a snake .. Some ar not loading
complete at all,
for me v6 is still not ready to deploy to the
> Management of companies need to be convinced. Technical folks
> typically know that they want it, but are not allowed to play with
> it...
Oh, I have heard a lot of tech excuses:
* Why should I bother with IPv6? IPv4 works fine!
* There could be potential security issues with IPv6, so better
On 2016-09-19 23:53, Roger Schmid wrote:
> |Come on folks, it is 2016! IPv6 is
> |*20 years* old...
> But still not matured enough to put on public usage
According to Google 10% of their traffic is IPv6.
Apple requires it for IOS.
How is it not 'mature'?
> beside of some
> design flaw it is in
|Come on folks, it is 2016! IPv6 is
|*20 years* old...
But still not matured enough to put on public usage, beside of some design flaw
it is in some cases even bad implemented
Maybe the isp/hoster/transit provider ned some teaching how to do it the right
way.
Em 15 de setembro de 2016
On 2016-09-15 20:04, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:11:44PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> Oh and note: Dual-stack IPv4 + IPv6, along with a /56 per user.
>
> What do you want this IPv4 stuff for? That's even, like, 40+ years old.
To access those ISPs that didn't
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:11:44PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> Oh and note: Dual-stack IPv4 + IPv6, along with a /56 per user.
What do you want this IPv4 stuff for? That's even, like, 40+ years old.
gert
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG
18 matches
Mail list logo
