On 17 jul 2013, at 23:09, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17/07/2013 19:13, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
...
Let me ask one thing... a couple of years ago, when I read the
specification of Teredo, I was quite impressed by the details (If
you accept the premise that
On 19 jul 2013, at 11:30, Marco Sommani marco.somm...@iit.cnr.it wrote:
On 18/lug/2013, at 22:09, Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com
wrote:
Wait... I had the impression that iff there was no other IPv6 connectivity,
Teredo was used in older Windows because of the generic prefer
Anyway, the users will have to pay for that. Too bad users of !AAPL
have to subsidize those decisions. Time for an AAPL user NAT tax? :)
Interesting idea. Put AAPL-OUI's IPv4-traffic in lousy-queue in the
BNG? :}
Or generally, help IPv6 out a little by adding general
IPv4-(latency)-tax?
/M
