On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, James Seng wrote: > One of the original reason that i-mode didnt go pure IP is they couldnt > get enough IP address for it (they designed i-mode to handle 6M users > originally) and that is quite huge for APNIC. IPv6 has been around for quite some time now, do you know what plans they have to utilise this? -- steven
- imode far superior to wap James P. Salsman
- Re: imode far superior to wap M�ns Nilsson
- Re: imode far superior to wap Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: imode far superior to wap Dave Crocker
- end-to-end w/i-Mode? (was Re: imode far superi... James P. Salsman
- Re: imode far superior to wap James Seng
- Re: imode far superior to wap Renfield Kuroda
- Re: imode far superior to wap John Stracke
- Re: imode far superior to wap Masataka Ohta
- Re: imode far superior to wap John Stracke
- Re: imode far superior to wap Steven Cotton
- Re: imode far superior to wap Francis Dupont
- Re: imode far superior to wap Masataka Ohta
- Re: imode far superior to wap Masataka Ohta
- Re: imode far superior to wap M�ns Nilsson
- Re: imode far superior to wap Masataka Ohta
- Re: imode far superior to wap James P. Salsman
- RE: imode far superior to wap Brijesh Kumar
- RE: imode far superior to wap John Day
- Re: imode far superior to wap George Michaelson
- RE: imode far superior to wap Shaw, Robert
