ouch..

[leigh.porter at ukbroadband.com (Leigh Porter)]

I'm looking forward to the awful experience of NAT444 promoting IPv6.


-- 
Leigh Porter


On 15 Sep 2011, at 00:37, "Mark Gauvin" <MGauvin at dryden.ca> wrote:

> Nat444 or frontal labotomy hmm let's see at least with the second I  
> would still be able to make a living as a micro soft network admin;)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 2011-09-14, at 6:07 PM, "James Jones" <james at freedomnet.co.nz> wrote:
> 
>> On 9/14/11 2:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>>> In a message written on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 09:24:25AM +1200, Don  
>>> Gould wrote:
>>>> How many of you have sat and thought about the merit of this web  
>>>> site?
>>> Ok, I'll take a swing at your list...
>>> 
>>>> * Does Juniper break promises?
>>> Yes.
>>> 
>>>> * Does Cisco break them?
>>> Yes.
>>> 
>>>> * What bad things and experiences have you had with Cisco, Juniper?
>>> It might take me several days, and many pages to compile that list.
>>> 
>>>> * What is the best technology for each company?
>>> Cisco: The AGS+ was ahead of its time.
>>> Jiniper: The Olive is quite nifty.
>>> 
>>>> * Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution?
>>> Yes, but I can't afford it.
>>> 
>>> Now, with that out of the way, how much does everyone else hate  
>>> even the
>>> thought of NAT444?
>>> 
>>> :) :) :)
>>> 
>> 
>> Just the thought of NAT444 makes my stomach turn.
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________