[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

what about the users re: NAT444 or ?

Subject: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 17:54:23 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <OFE03D0C83.D3E7AC70-ON85257904.005DDB08-85257904.005DF395@videotron.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAD6AjGTQvx3OaVM5syPxR_9DZiEBp1Ls7ijqE0A_UvgvHcOUAg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

> Can we really push an IPv6 agenda for CDN's when IPv6 routing at high 
> backend levels is still not complete?  I certainly don't have the 
> 'clout' to push that, but full routing between Cogent and HE needs to be 
> fixed.

if you are worried about full v4 or v6 or v8-juice routing between
cogent and X, for many values of X, then you will never be unworried.

randy

References:
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: Jean-Francois.TremblayING at videotron.com (Jean-Francois.TremblayING at videotron.com)
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: seth.mos at dds.nl (Seth Mos)
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: leigh.porter at ukbroadband.com (Leigh Porter)
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: leigh.porter at ukbroadband.com (Leigh Porter)
- NAT444 or ?
  - From: cb.list6 at gmail.com (Cameron Byrne)
- what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
  - From: cdel at firsthand.net (Christian de Larrinaga)
- what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
  - From: lyle at lcrcomputer.net (Lyle Giese)

Prev by Date: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
Next by Date: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
Previous by thread: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
Next by thread: what about the users re: NAT444 or ?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread