ryan We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just
ryan confirmed today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
[...]
ryan Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require
ryan IPv4
It's a hack (but all ipv6 transition stuff is...) but have you tried
using
On 2011-07-23 17:44 , Paul Ebersman wrote:
ryan We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just
ryan confirmed today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
[...]
ryan Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require
ryan IPv4
It's a hack (but all ipv6
On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 4:22 PM, James Harr james.h...@gmail.com wrote:
If you really really need address obfuscation, you can still do NAT,
but NAT from public addresses to public a public address or pool of
Well,
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
default.
In the context of addresses I'm using to manage kit, having devices randomly
renumber themselves at regular intervals does *not* sound like it's going to
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 13:12, Tim Franklin t...@pelican.org wrote:
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
default.
In the context of addresses I'm using to manage kit, having devices
randomly
On 07/18/2011 06:12, Tim Franklin wrote:
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
default.
In the context of addresses I'm using to manage kit, having devices
randomly renumber themselves at regular
: best practices for management nets in IPv6
On 07/18/2011 06:12, Tim Franklin wrote:
You can also use IPv6 privacy extensions (by default on Windows 7),
see rfc4941. For Linux, you can also enable it, which is not a
default.
In the context of addresses I'm using to manage kit, having devices
Subject: RE: best practices for management nets in IPv6
We keep running into problem with our IPv6 roll out. I just confirmed
today that Exchange does not fully support IPv6
Cheers
Ryan
-Original Message-
From: Doug Barton [mailto:do...@dougbarton.us]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2011 4:59 PM
Yes sorry Exchange 2010 - OCS, Lync, Exchange UM - these require IPv4
Cheers
Ryan
-Original Message-
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2011 12:34 AM
To: Ryan Finnesey
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: best practices for management nets in IPv6
Which
Maslak
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: best practices for management nets in IPv6
I couldn't agree more. If you set up private address space, it's going to come
back and make more work for you later. Set up public IPv6 addresses. If you
need stateful connection filtering, put in a stateful firewall
I couldn't agree more. If you set up private address space, it's going
to come back and make more work for you later. Set up public IPv6
addresses. If you need stateful connection filtering, put in a
stateful firewall.
If you really really need address obfuscation, you can still do NAT,
but NAT
On Jul 12, 2011, at 5:31 PM, Tom Ammon wrote:
On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
approach for addressing them? Do you use ULA? Or do you use global addresses
and just depend on router ACLs to protect things? How close are we to having
a central
Hi All,
We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our operation, and
I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
approach for addressing them? Do you use ULA? Or do you use global
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Tom Ammon tom.am...@utah.edu wrote:
Hi All,
We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our operation,
and I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
On Jul 12, 2011 2:33 PM, Tom Ammon tom.am...@utah.edu wrote:
Hi All,
We're pushing to get IPv6 deployed and working everywhere in our
operation, and I had some questions about best practices for a few things.
On your management nets (network device management nets) , what's the best
approach
Public IPs.
At some point you will have to manage something outside your current world or
your organization will need to merge/partner/outsource/contract/etc with
someone else's network and they might not be keen to route to your ULA space
(and might not be more trustworthy than the internet
16 matches
Mail list logo
