standardization - RFC 1883.
I'm wondering when we reach another significant milestone - 50% :-)
Tomas
Original Message
Subject:Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 10:14:18 +0100
From: Tomas Podermanski <tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz>
To:
Hey!
New message, please read <http://dinkinsautoservice.com/opinion.php?cm9w>
Tomas Podermanski
False alarm. Sorry for vain hope (if there was any). IPv6 is back in
normal. Seatbelts can be unfasten.
T.
On 6/24/13 2:39 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
there is massive increase in IPv6 adoption (from 1.5% to 1.7%) in the
past few days.
luckily i had my seatbelt fastened
randy
Hi,
according to Google IPv6 statistics
(http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html) there is massive
increase in IPv6 adoption (from 1.5% to 1.7%) in the past few days. I
think it is the biggest increase ever. Does anyone have any idea what
happened?
T.
Hi networking guys,
I need some help :-). We try to find for our department reliable
solution for L2 VPN. The task is to connect two remote data centers,
each of them connected two 1Gbps lines (with link aggregation). Only IP
connectivity between data centers is available (so there is no
Hi,
It seems that today is a big day for IPv6. It is the very first
time when native IPv6 on google statistics
(http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html) reached 1%. Some
might say it is tremendous success after 16 years of deploying IPv6 :-)
T.
Hi,
On 11/20/12 7:24 PM, Blair Trosper wrote:
I've found myself becoming a snob about IPv6. I almost look down on
IPv4-only networks in the same way that I won't go see a film that isn't
projected on DLP unless my arm is twisted. I'm a convert, and I'm glad to
see the adoption rate edging
Hi,
On 12/23/11 7:48 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Tomas Podermanski tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz
wrote:
Well, then how many devices do you have in the network that uses IPv6?
Good question, and I applaud you for wanting to verify that people
talking about IPv6 have
be at a point where we
have some useful technology to provide. You can either talk about the
challenges of IPv6 deployment, or actively try to find solutions to
them for everyone is the general idea.
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Tomas Podermanski tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz
wrote:
Hi,
On 12/23
Hi,
On 12/23/11 7:07 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011, Tomas Podermanski wrote:
Hi,
On 12/21/11 9:40 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
I'm afraid you're about 10 years too late for this opinion to make
much difference. ;-)
My opinion is that there is never too late to make thinks easier
Hi,
On 12/23/11 4:33 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Sent from my iPad
On Dec 23, 2011, at 3:46 AM, Tomas Podermanski tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz wrote:
Hi,
On 12/22/11 12:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
The long answer is:
I completely disagree with opinion that both DHCPv6 and RA (SLAAC)
should
On 12/23/11 6:56 AM, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Tomas Podermanski wrote:
Hi,
from my perspective the short answer for this never-ending story is:
- SLAAC/RA is totally useless, does not bring any benefit at all
and should be removed from IPv6 specs
- DHCPv6 should
Hi,
On 12/23/11 9:09 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Tomas Podermanski tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz
wrote:
That is true, but we know solution for IPv4 (DHCP snooping, ARP
protection, source address validation) and there are access switches on
the market having that security
strategy for deploying IPv6 :-(.
Tomas
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Tomas Podermanski tpo...@cis.vutbr.cz
wrote:
Hi,
from my perspective the short answer for this never-ending story is:
- SLAAC/RA is totally useless, does not bring any benefit at all
and should be removed from IPv6 specs
Hi,
On 12/22/11 12:04 AM, Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 12/21/11 12:40, Ray Soucy wrote:
I'm afraid you're about 10 years too late for this opinion to make
much difference. ;-)
We have been running IPv6 in production for several years (2008) as
well (answering this email over IPv6 now,
Hi,
On 12/22/11 12:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
The long answer is:
I completely disagree with opinion that both DHCPv6 and RA (SLAAC)
should be supported. It is easy to say that both have place but it has
some consequences. I and my colleagues have been working on deploying
IPv6 for a few
IPv6 in University Campus Network - Practical Problems
http://www.fit.vutbr.cz/research/view_pub.php?id=9836
Regards,
Tomas Podermanski
On 12/20/11 8:31 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Different operators will have different preferences in different environments.
Ideally, the IETF should provide
Hi Daniel,
all IPv6 multihoming ideas are very theoretical today. None of them
is ready to use. Shim6 looks very good, but it requires support on both
a client and a server side. As you can guess, there is only experimental
support for some operating systems. Microsoft and Apple doesn't
18 matches
Mail list logo
