static IPs [was Re: ipv6-ops Digest, Vol 159, Issue 1]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Sat Oct 26 22:20:39 CEST 2019
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 09:07:42PM -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
> Not sure how many more 100's of messages are needed before we get to do
> something about it...
If something the IETF makes is not working properly out in the field,
it's never the IETF's fault. So you must be doing it all wrong.
The trick here seems to be to argue long enough to make people give up
and deploy IPv4 instead (lots of money to be made fixing other people's
NAT444 setups that nobody understand anymore, but "IPv4 is much easier!" -
just as a side note).
Seriously: I think your draft is a necessary document - whether to do it
in one or three documents, not sure, but maybe reaching individual
consensus is easier.
Gert Doering
-- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20191026/94ebf94f/attachment.sig>
More information about the ipv6-ops
mailing list