On 31/Mar/20 12:09, sth...@nethelp.no wrote:
> Note that there have been multiple requests for DHCPv6 to do this but
> every attempt has been shot down.
Yep - thankfully, we have an option.
Operating two address assignment protocols is just silly.
At my house, I don't even bother with
On 31/Mar/20 02:30, Roger Wiklund wrote:
>
>
> When I read DHCPv6 vs SLAAC it often boils down to "control" but I
> don't see the need to allocate a dynamic address if the autogenerated
> are used. For client's you dont really have any inbound connections
> unless it's a support case.
>
>
On 31/Jan/20 20:13, Dominik Bay wrote:
> Hi,
>
> a few days ago T-Mobile DE officially launched their IPv6-only APN
> internet.v6.telekom.
> As I expected, this is working well across most of my devices.
Awesome!
Mark.
On 10/May/19 06:27, Doug Barton wrote:
> It's been a while since I was configuring subnets, and last time I did
> the guidance was always no more than 1,000 hosts per subnet/vlan. A
> lot of that was IPv4 thinking regarding broadcast domains, but
> generally speaking we kept to it for dual
On Saturday, November 29, 2014 09:38:39 PM Thomas Schäfer
wrote:
ping6 www.jool.mx
PING www.jool.mx(2001:1250:ffe0:1::8) 56 data bytes
From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=1 Time exceeded: Hop limit
From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=2 Time exceeded: Hop limit
From 2806:0:0:100::1 icmp_seq=3 Time
On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 09:52:43 AM Tarko Tikan wrote:
I will do technical writeup on the tech we are using
after we get our PR out (which should be soon).
That would be awesome.
For consumer broadband deployments, it would be nice to know
what technologies you and others have gone
On Tuesday, November 04, 2014 02:27:03 PM Bjørn Mork wrote:
Erik has already provided some details on the CPE side.
So I will try to add a bit of network details.
Very nice, Bjorn. Thanks!
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Friday, June 20, 2014 02:10:55 PM Phil Mayers wrote:
But IME transition from (*,g) to (s,g) and RP-tree
flooding is where a lot of PIM-related issues occur, so
I am totally on board with preferring SSM where
possible.
In NG-MVPN's, you have two options for transition; RTP-SPT
which is
On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 09:46:14 AM Jens Link wrote:
It's always good to have more than one IP per server,
this way you run multiple Servers per IP (e.g. DNS or
HTTP). This might get a little dirty but sometimes it
necessary. For internal Server I would go with a /64 or
maybe a /112.
