Our timing is perfect!

On that other issue if it's Openreach then drop me a note and I can take a 
look. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On 8 Nov 2016, at 09:40, Christian de Larrinaga <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I'm always happy to see ISPs and content networks step up to support v6.
> This latest IAB statement shows just how urgent it is for all networks
> to provide and interconnect openly with v6.
> 
> But the statement shows it is now time to be planning the next step and
> not require or expect v4. 
> https://www.iab.org/2016/11/07/iab-statement-on-ipv6/
> 
> Talktalk --- anybody from TalkTalk here?
> 
> C
> 
> PS I'm still using v6 tunnels and other v6 gear first configured more
> than a decade ago and it is pretty stable and cheap.  But I accept scale
> and legacy are both factors that complicate the picture.
> 
> I have experienced problems with one well regarded v6 provider over FTTH
> product I ordered for a friend's place over a year ago, turning out to
> be caused by firmware in their provided router not working well with
> FTTH infrastructure locally which the vendor appears unwilling to fix. 
> It shows there are a lot of moving pieces with the  UK's hybrid network
> infrastructures which is one reason why I am not a fan of xDSL for IP
> networks even when it is symmetric.
> 
> 
> Neil J. McRae wrote:
>> I don't think anyone ever denied it was the future (well actually I
>> thought there was a better future that didn't require the mess we have
>> now but hey!) but think of all the suckers^w "innovators" that
>> deployed it ten years ago that will have spent a fortune with probably
>> at least two cycles of hardware... as always predicted people would
>> move when they needed... 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Neil 
>> 
>> On 7 Nov 2016, at 20:05, Christian de Larrinaga <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> 
>>> ROFLOL  v6 must be the future then after all
>>> C
> 
> -- 
> Christian de Larrinaga  FBCS, CITP,
> -------------------------
> @ FirstHand
> -------------------------
> +44 7989 386778
> [email protected]
> -------------------------
> 

Reply via email to