ovhcdn

hi there, i am looking for a network engineering/peering contact from ovhcdn. please let me know if you know anyone offlist thank you

Re: A crazy idea

Owen DeLong wrote: On Jul 29, 2021, at 14:06 , Joe Maimon wrote: t...@pelican.org wrote: On Monday, 19 July, 2021 14:04, "Stephen Satchell" said: The allocation of IPv6 space with prefixes shorter than /64 is indeed a consideration for bigger administrative domains like country

Anyone from an ISP that is part of ACAM / ACAM II ?

Is there anyone on the list that's from an ISP that's participating in the ACAM or ACAM II programs? If so, I'd like to ask a couple of questions (off-list) specifically about the speed testing requirements. Thanks Shawn

Re: IANA 6to4 assignment status

I see, thanks for the explanation. One follow-up question: Why is the designation "6to4" rather than "IANA"? I would have expected the latter, as 2002::/16---similarly to the individual parts of 2001::/23---is listed under IANA's IPv6 Special-Purpose Address Registry. Thanks in advance,

Re: IANA 6to4 assignment status

On Mon, 02 Aug 2021 11:57:54 +0200, Lars Prehn said: > Is there a reason why the status of 2002::/16 in IANA's IPv6 unicast > assignments list [1] is ALLOCATED (with '6to4' as designation and the > note field indicating reservation) rather than RESERVED? It can probably be moved back to

Re: IANA 6to4 assignment status

On 2021-08-02 10:57, Lars Prehn wrote: Hi, Is there a reason why the status of 2002::/16 in IANA's IPv6 unicast assignments list [1] is ALLOCATED (with '6to4' as designation and the note field indicating reservation) rather than RESERVED? Best regards, Lars Perhaps something to do with it

IANA 6to4 assignment status

Hi, Is there a reason why the status of 2002::/16 in IANA's IPv6 unicast assignments list [1] is ALLOCATED (with '6to4' as designation and the note field indicating reservation) rather than RESERVED? Best regards, Lars [1]