yum IPv6 repos

[Mark Tinka]

On Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:10:41 AM Cameron Byrne 
wrote:

> Agreed, that  IPv4-only will be around for a long long
> time, hence the need to understand NAT64/DNS64.

Some folks will continue to push NAT44, others NAT444, and 
some of us will push NAT64. It's all choice, trade-offs, 
yadda yadda...

While there is bound to be a lot more breakage in NAT64 
today due to lack of IPv6 support in common applications 
such as Skype, Yahoo Messenger, e.t.c., I believe these can 
be fixed by software vendors adding IPv6 support into their 
code. 

Hopefully, it will get to a stage where NAT64 isn't anymore 
broken than NAT44 or NAT444 when it comes to translation.

For us, NAT64 makes sense because we don't have to 
transition customers in the future when traffic ratios are 
in favour of IPv6 (whenever that is).

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20111227/a5c0bfcf/attachment-0001.bin