On Thu, October 4, 2007 6:49 am, Mike Leber wrote:
As the data at http://bgp.he.net/ipv6-progress-report.cgi shows for the
IPv6 and IPv4 nameserver tests, some of the time IPv6 connectivity is
*faster* than IPv4 connectivity (66 out of 264 test cases), because of
network topology differences
one: AS hop count for average e2e packet flow, eg. from origin to destination,
how many ASN's will a packet traverse?
two: number/location of IX that monitor/forbid transit across exchange fabric?
--bill (doing grunt work for a study on Landauer Entropy)
2007/10/4, David E. Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I imagine the cost of backhauling traffic a few thousand miles in
underseas cables would add to the cost of running an ISP in, say,
Australia, especially since many sites the end-users will want to see
are still hosted in the US.
In Europe, the
On 4/10/2007, at 11:07 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't dug too deep into NAT-PT, but an obvious question comes to
mind: Why would an ISP deliver an IPv6-only connection plus
NAT-PT (and all the likely problems) with a surcharge for
IPv4 instead of delivering RFC1918
4 matches
Mail list logo
