Looking at http://mydeviceinfo.comcast.net you get a choice of wireless
or IPv6 in Arris.
I Wish they would ask which you want before install: I already have better
wireless, and the Arris ones don't let you disable theirs :/
Thank you for the pointer - perhaps a swap is in order.
David
On 1/30/2013 9:10 PM, David Barak wrote:
IPv6 has been launched on all Arris DOCSIS 3.0 C4 CMTSes, covering
over 50% our network.
The update you sent is lovely, except I can tell you that the one (also an
Arris, running DOCSIS 3.0) which was installed in late October in my house in
On 11/28/12 4:17 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering organizations to
say in unison we are deploying IPv6 and will only recommend products that pass
testing.
Do you see any evidence
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which
I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If
it was any simpler somebody else would have had to install it.
On 01/30/2013 01:51 PM, Cutler James R wrote:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of which I
bought at frys I have ipv6 in my house with dhcp pd curtesy of commcast. If it
was any simpler
In message 51099c0f.5040...@mtcc.com, Michael Thomas writes:
On 01/30/2013 01:51 PM, Cutler James R wrote:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 12:43 PM, joel jaeggli joe...@bogus.com wrote:
As a product of having a motorola sb6121 and a netgear wndr3700 both of wh
ich I bought at frys I have ipv6 in my
Comcast removed the no IPv6 excuse? That removal somehow skipped my house in
Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router which does not even
support it (an Arrus voice gateway- the one where you can#39;t turn of the
crummy 2.4g wireless radio) and none of the folks I#39;ve
In message 1359591223.5270.yahoomailmob...@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com, David
Barak writes:
Comcast removed the no IPv6 excuse? That removal somehow skipped my house
in Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router which does not
even support it (an Arrus voice gateway- the
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
Firstly fix your mail client. What's this #39; garbage in text/plain?
That's yahoo web mail on an iPhone, sorry.
Deployment Update
Published on Tuesday, October 23, 2012
IPv6 has been launched on all Arris DOCSIS 3.0 C4
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, David Barak wrote:
Comcast removed the no IPv6 excuse? That removal somehow skipped my
house in Washington DC where they installed (last October) a router
which does not even support it (an Arrus voice gateway- the one where
you can#39;t turn of the crummy 2.4g wireless
- Original Message -
From: Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org
I know Verizon is rolling out v6 in some areas of their FiOS footprint.
The router they provided supports it, but what I got from their customer
service people was that they ran into some sort of issue with their TV
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, David Barak wrote:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
The update you sent is lovely, except I can tell you that the one (also
an Arris, running DOCSIS 3.0) which was installed in late October in my
house in Washington simply does not run v6
In message 8c10ded0-0980-4c76-8307-4f4f139d6...@yahoo.com, David Barak writes
:
On Jan 30, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
Firstly fix your mail client. What's this #39; garbage in text/plain?
That's yahoo web mail on an iPhone, sorry.
Deployment Update
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:22:43PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
VZF's ONTs can't even do *ARP* right, or at least they couldn't as of
last March. We expect them to do v6?
Perfect! We don't *need* ARP for v6!
ps. I work for a division of my employer that does not yet have IPv6 support
in its rather popular consumer software product. Demand for IPv6 from our
rather large customer base is, at present, essentially nonexistent, and other
things would be way above it in the stack-ranked backlog(s)
On 12/1/2012 11:55 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Yes, but unlike Skype, most popular applications have competitors and
whichever competitor provides the better user experience will cut the
others off from a meaningful proportion of their customers. Owen
I think you're assuming some magic that lets
On 12/01/2012 11:55 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
ps. I work for a division of my employer that does not yet have IPv6 support in
its rather popular consumer software product. Demand for IPv6 from our rather
large customer base is, at present, essentially nonexistent, and other things
would be way
Everything you need to know except for how to actually accomplish this
task in the real world.
In order to accomplish this in the real world using present-day software
development methodologies you would need to do a few more things:
- Generate some user stories that explain why the
Adding IPv6 support isn't like adding most new features. It doesn't
give most people something extra. It doesn't enhance the experience.
It is insurance for when the CGN is deployed by the ISP or when the
ISP goes IPv6 only and like most insurance you don't know when you
will needed and you
On 11/27/2012 11:48 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I agree that some of it comes down to knowledge; most programmers
learn from experience and lets face it unless you go looking your
unlikely to run into IPv6 even as of yet. I believe as the ISP
implements IPv6 and companies get more demand on the
I'll see your disagree and raise you another ;-)
I would say you almost never want to store addresses as character data
unless the only thing you're using them for is logging (even then it's
questionable). I run into people who do this all the time and it's a
nightmare.
It's easy to store a v6
On 11/30/2012 09:45 AM, Ray Soucy wrote:
I'll see your disagree and raise you another ;-)
I would say you almost never want to store addresses as character data
unless the only thing you're using them for is logging (even then it's
questionable). I run into people who do this all the time and
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
I'll see your disagree and raise you another ;-)
I would say you almost never want to store addresses as character data
unless the only thing you're using them for is logging (even then it's
questionable). I run into people who
On Nov 30, 2012, at 11:09 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
I'll see your disagree and raise you another ;-)
I would say you almost never want to store addresses as character data
unless the only thing you're using
-
Well I want to add my 10 cents,
I am a c++ programmer, and have been waiting for my isp to offer native
ipv6 for ever. I got fed up with waiting and setup a ipv6 over ipv4
tunnel. So once I got that done, I spent only an hour updating my socket
classes to support ipv6. I hadent done so
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Randy na...@afxr.net wrote:
-
Well I want to add my 10 cents,
I am a c++ programmer, and have been waiting for my isp to offer native ipv6
for ever. I got fed up with waiting and setup a ipv6 over ipv4 tunnel. So
once I got that done, I spent only an hour
In message cap-gugwtcoafenkqsxsssomxmy1sqs2ofaprv26ww+gfvfp...@mail.gmail.com,
William Herrin writes:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Randy na...@afxr.net wrote:
-
Well I want to add my 10 cents,
I am a c++ programmer, and have been waiting for my isp to offer native ipv6
for ever. I
I would guess that a lot of the access growth going forward is going to
be a lot of what I would term incidental access. More and more
devices and technology requires or supports Internet access. So while a
lot of people may not ask for internet service that don't already have
it, it will be
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message
cap-gugwtcoafenkqsxsssomxmy1sqs2ofaprv26ww+gfvfp...@mail.gmail.com,
William Herrin writes:
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Randy na...@afxr.net wrote:
It wasn't difficult to update to ipv6, only some reading was
Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net writes:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
But I will absolutely refuse the idea that anyone incapable of
getting their application tested with IPv6 are able to create any
useful networking software.
Who's talking about 'networking software'?
On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
If it doesn't do IPv4 then I don't see the need for IPv6 support.
To me, 'networking software' software which happens to access the network.
Quagga is an example of 'networking software'.
Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net writes:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:28 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
If it doesn't do IPv4 then I don't see the need for IPv6 support.
To me, 'networking software' software which happens to access the
network. Quagga is an example of 'networking software'.
OK, that
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
What's the proper term for software which happens to access the network?
Just about anything, these days.
;
'Network-enabled' or 'network-capable' software, maybe?
---
Roland
On 29 November 2012 12:48, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
What's the proper term for software which happens to access the network?
Just about anything, these days.
;
'Network-enabled' or 'network-capable' software, maybe?
On 2012-11-29 13:53 , . wrote:
On 29 November 2012 12:48, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
What's the proper term for software which happens to access the network?
Just about anything, these days.
;
'Network-enabled' or
You should store IPv6 as a pair of 64-bit integers. While PHP lacks
the function set to do this on its own, it's not very difficult to do.
Here are a set of functions I wrote a while back to do just that
(though I admit I should spend some time to try and make it more
elegant and I'm not sure
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 1:30 PM, david peahi davidpe...@gmail.com wrote:
Do today's programmers still use basic BSD socket programming? Is there an
equivalent set of called procedures for IPv6 network application
programming?
The IPv6 API is BSD sockets. However, unless you were a particularly
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
You should store IPv6 as a pair of 64-bit integers. While PHP lacks
the function set to do this on its own, it's not very difficult to do.
Hi Ray,
I have to disagree. In your SQL database you should store addresses as
a fixed
Hadn't thought about it that way before. This was a useful bit of info,
thanks.
-Blake
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 8:55 AM, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote:
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
You should store IPv6 as a pair of 64-bit integers. While PHP lacks
On 11/28/2012 09:40 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
On 2012-11-28 18:26, Michael Thomas wrote:
It's very presumptuous for you to tell me what my development/test
priorities ought to be, and I can tell you for absolute certain that any
such badgering will be met with rolled eyes and quick dismissal.
Subject: Re: Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6
in their applications Date: Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 09:55:19AM -0500 Quoting
William Herrin (b...@herrin.us):
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
You should store IPv6 as a pair of
Got some bad data here. Let me help.
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 29, 2012 8:22 AM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Phone apps, by and large, are designed by people in homes or
small companies. They do not have v6 connectivity. Full stop.
They don't care about v6. Full stop. It's
On 11/29/2012 10:36 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote:
Got some bad data here. Let me help.
Sent from ipv6-only Android
On Nov 29, 2012 8:22 AM, Michael Thomas m...@mtcc.com
mailto:m...@mtcc.com wrote:
Phone apps, by and large, are designed by people in homes or
small companies. They do not have v6
In message CALFTrnM+a56hx3CP0qqszfNrbirQZOefS_0uHVC8VQk=+qd...@mail.gmail.com
, Ray Soucy writes:
You should store IPv6 as a pair of 64-bit integers. While PHP lacks
the function set to do this on its own, it's not very difficult to do.
I did it as a array of 8, 16 bit integers with a old
Why would I want to do that instead of store it as a single 128 bit integer or
bit-field?
Owen
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 29, 2012, at 6:01 AM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
You should store IPv6 as a pair of 64-bit integers. While PHP lacks
the function set to do this on its own, it's
I have read a little of this BS thread.
1) I have been maintaining a network for 12 years.
2) I am and have been since Feb 1965 a programmer.
Anyone who bashes either group has a problem.
First, at one time programmers knew bits, bytes, opcodes, machine codes
etc. I have written close to
david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org writes:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways
to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse.
bull. explain using a tunnel broker to anyone who isn't a network
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Bjørn Mork bj...@mork.no wrote:
david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org writes:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways
to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse.
Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net writes:
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:52 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Do you really want to run netowrking software written by someone incapable
of setting up a test network?
If you don't think you're running some piece or another of software
right this minute which
On Nov 28, 2012, at 7:23 PM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Anyway, I am not sure which programs that would be.
You run a lot more than that in your everyday life. And if you don't, you're
atypical.
---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Do you really want to run netowrking software written by someone
incapable of setting up a test network? This doesn't have anything with
tunnel brokers or native access to do at all.
So the software engineer should now -also- be responsible for, and
On 2012-11-28 17:30 , david raistrick wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Do you really want to run netowrking software written by someone
incapable of setting up a test network? This doesn't have anything with
tunnel brokers or native access to do at all.
So the software
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Not for faking it, but in the case you mention it is very obvious that
the software engineer should be able to ask their network team to make
sure that they can access those API's if only for testing...
You're assuming, now, that the network team
david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org writes:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Do you really want to run netowrking software written by someone
incapable of setting up a test network? This doesn't have anything with
tunnel brokers or native access to do at all.
So the software
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Maybe so. But do I _want_ do run that software? No.
Anyway, I am not sure which programs that would be. The applications
with open sockets on my laptop are currently:
I take it you're in the minority who don't play games, use mobile apps on
your
On 11/28/2012 09:00 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
And still, if you as a proper engineer where not able to test/add IPv6
code in the last 10++ years, then you did something very very wrong in
your job, the least of which is to file a ticket for IPv6 support in the
ticket tracking system so that one
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bjørn Mork wrote:
Native IPv6 internet access has never been a requirement for developing
IPv6 aware applications. That was a bad excuse even 10 years ago. Today
it is just ridiculous.
I certainly never said that was the case. I built v6 test networks, and
helped
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, david raistrick wrote:
folks that sign the checks ask for A B and C. And v6 isn't one of those
things yet.
I believe they ask for the apps to work on the Internet. Part of that
requirement is soon to be a requirement for IPv6 support.
I believe the person signing the
Subject: Re: Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6
in their applications Date: Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 06:45:54PM +0100 Quoting
Mikael Abrahamsson (swm...@swm.pp.se):
I believe they ask for the apps to work on the Internet. Part of
that requirement is soon to be
Many years ago the standard books on application network programming were
based on C language. Books such as Adventures in UNIX Network
Programming, and Professor Comer's Internetworking with TCP/IP Vol 3
detailed how to write C programs using BSD sockets where binding to a
socket brought the
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, david peahi wrote:
On the practical side: Have all programmers created a 128 bit field to
store the IPv6 address, where IPv4 programs use a 32 bit field to store
the IP address? This would seem to be similar to the year 2000 case
where almost all programs required
Am 28.11.2012 19:30, schrieb david peahi:
Many years ago the standard books on application network programming were
based on C language. Books such as Adventures in UNIX Network
Programming, and Professor Comer's Internetworking with TCP/IP Vol 3
detailed how to write C programs using BSD
On Nov 28, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Ingo Flaschberger i...@xip.at wrote:
Am 28.11.2012 19:30, schrieb david peahi:
Many years ago the standard books on application network programming were
based on C language. Books such as Adventures in UNIX Network
Programming, and Professor Comer's
Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 28, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
If the entire deployment path automatically requires 84 layers of NAT
sludge, that's what gets tested, cause it works for everybody.
Hence my questions regarding the actual momentum behind end-to-end
native IPv6
On 11/28/2012 10:30 AM, david peahi wrote:
On the practical side: Have all programmers created a 128 bit field to
store the IPv6 address, where IPv4 programs use a 32 bit field to store the
IP address? This would seem to be similar to the year 2000 case where
almost all programs required
-Original Message-
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com]
That won't help. Think about it this way. A session state log entry is
roughly 512 bytes.
[math redacted]
you're still looking at roughly 85 Petabytes of
storage required to meet CALEA standards.
I've done my share of
In message 009301cdcdb2$e4f55ad0$aee01070$@asgard.org, Lee Howard writes:
Doesn't matter, because the servers aren't logging port number, so nobody
will ever need
to see those logs.
We log port numbers along with addresses in named as it is necessary
to trouble shoot problems. We have been
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering
organizations to say in unison we are deploying IPv6 and will only recommend
products that pass testing.
Do you see any evidence of that occurring? I don't.
Also, a lot
On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
But I will absolutely refuse the idea that anyone incapable of getting their
application tested with IPv6 are able to create any useful networking
software.
Who's talking about 'networking software'? 'Networking software' is irrelevant
for
In message cfb0f4de-3e7e-4cc2-a491-3b0e9741c...@arbor.net, Dobbins, Roland
writes:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 12:18 AM, Bj=F8rn Mork wrote:
But I will absolutely refuse the idea that anyone incapable of getting
their application tested with IPv6 are able to create any useful
networking
On Nov 29, 2012, at 7:42 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
Read the Subject.
Nothing about 'networking software' there . . .
Unless your definition of 'networking software' is 'software which has an
inherent capability to transmit/receive data over the network', which would
include lots of lots of
On Nov 28, 2012, at 4:17 PM, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Nov 29, 2012, at 3:04 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
Getting the cpe vendors to ship in quantity requires the ISP engineering
organizations to say in unison we are deploying IPv6 and will only
recommend products that pass
On 2012-11-28 18:26, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 11/28/2012 09:00 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
And still, if you as a proper engineer where not able to test/add IPv6
code in the last 10++ years, then you did something very very wrong in
your job, the least of which is to file a ticket for IPv6
On 2012-11-27 20:21, mike wrote:
On 11/26/12 9:32 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most
programmers totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing
is being done.
This is a point that is probably more significant than is
On 2012-11-27, at 21:07, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As such, if an application does not do proper IPv6 today the people in
charge of the thing simply did not care...
Or do care.
From http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HadoopIPv6:
Apache Hadoop does not currently support IPv6 networks, it uses IPv4
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways
to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse.
bull. explain using a tunnel broker to anyone who isn't a network
engineer.
oh, and then make that work
Personally I have ran into this dilema a few times.
The code just like network equipment needs dual stacks which is double
the amount of code and since IPv4 and IPv6 do not share a native
topology just supporting both kinds of addresses isnt sufficient.
I agree that some of it comes down to
In message 84f8debc-c754-4d06-99b0-405cc8a35...@josephholsten.com, Joseph Hol
sten writes:
On 2012-11-27, at 21:07, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As such, if an application does not do proper IPv6 today the people in
charge of the thing simply did not care...
Or do care.=20
=46rom
On 11/27/2012 01:07 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
On 2012-11-27 20:21, mike wrote:
This is a point that is probably more significant than is
appreciated. If the app, IT, and networking ecosystem don't even have
access to ipv6 to play around with, you can be guaranteed that they
are going to be
In message alpine.bsf.2.00.1211271621190.85...@murf.icantclick.org, david rai
strick writes:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways
to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse.
bull.
On Nov 27, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Bryan Tong cont...@nullivex.com wrote:
Personally I have ran into this dilema a few times.
The code just like network equipment needs dual stacks which is double
the amount of code and since IPv4 and IPv6 do not share a native
topology just supporting both
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote:
I cannot be saf for the people who claim to be programmers who do things
with networking and who do not care to follow the heavy hints that they
have been getting for at least the last 10 years that their applications
need
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Andrews wrote:
oh, and then make that work inside a typical F500 corp network with
restrictions on inbound and outbound ports, no admin user access to
desktop machines, etc.
And if they are developing a product for the company there are
procedures to get the changes
In message cap-guguzu-or-gtrp3vdahpk-btam1gzyt8ytjf0ppcb8ke...@mail.gmail.com
, William Herrin writes:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote:
I cannot be saf for the people who claim to be programmers who do things
with networking and who do not care to follow
On Nov 27, 2012, at 1:26 PM, david raistrick dr...@icantclick.org wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote:
As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways
to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse.
bull. explain using a tunnel
I agree that some of it comes down to knowledge; most programmers
learn from experience and lets face it unless you go looking your
unlikely to run into IPv6 even as of yet. I believe as the ISP
implements IPv6 and companies get more demand on the customer facing
side of things it will pick
On 27 Nov 2012, at 23:44, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote:
Given the number of network engineers compared to the number of tunnel broker
subscribers just at Hurricane Electric, I don't think that argument holds
water.
We have actually made using a tunnel broker very easy and provide
On 11/27/2012 03:44 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
I would think that a developer of corporate network-based applications that is
worth his salt would be one of the people pushing the IT/Neteng group to give
him the tools to do his job. If he waits until they are implementing IPv6 on
corporate
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
I've coded for platforms that I have never worked on. It's a little
more difficult but not impossible. I've debugged problems on
machines that I don't have access to. Again it is more difficult
but not impossible.
Sure, but
I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation.
Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes IPv6, they need
to accommodate the effects of all the other programmers who aren't writing a
line of IPv6 code. CGN renders most application logs useless unless they
On Nov 27, 2012, at 19:18 , Dave Edelman dedel...@iname.com wrote:
I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation.
Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes IPv6, they need
to accommodate the effects of all the other programmers who aren't writing a
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not
be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use. They are
after all just a VPN and millions of road warriers use them everyday.
Oh, for crumb's sake. You're
On Nov 28, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
If the entire deployment path automatically requires 84 layers of NAT sludge,
that's what gets tested, cause it works for everybody.
Hence my questions regarding the actual momentum behind end-to-end native IPv6
deployment. Inertia is
In message 20121128041816.gf1...@dyn.com, Andrew Sullivan writes:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not
be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use. They are
after all just a VPN and
On 11/27/2012 09:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message 20121128041816.gf1...@dyn.com, Andrew Sullivan writes:
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote:
If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not
be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use.
On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
And using some tunnel brokers are just as easy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
;
---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net // http://www.arbornetworks.com
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:04:56PM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote:
Let's be clear: nobody sets up a VPN because they want to.
And further, only people who think cell phones are newfangled think
that configuring dial-up before ppp was available is a test we can
apply to _anything_ for the quality
On 11/27/2012 09:20 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
And using some tunnel brokers are just as easy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
;
When I subscribed I never dreamed I would post anything, as I am not a
network engineer,
On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Nigel Stepp wrote:
So there's one data point with the promise of others.
You are atypical in comparison the the legions of ordinary developers within
enterprise organizations, in terms of your skillset, your breadth of
perspective, and your ability to effectuate
In message 69adb141-d40b-4dfb-8fbc-d0863897b...@delong.com, Owen DeLong write
s:
On Nov 27, 2012, at 19:18 , Dave Edelman dedel...@iname.com wrote:
I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation.=20=
=20
Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes
1 - 100 of 101 matches
Mail list logo
