This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
bmanning at karoshi.com
bmanning at karoshi.com
Tue May 15 11:34:48 CEST 2007
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 01:30:01PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: > bmanning at karoshi.com wrote: > >>ULA-central is NOT intended to be uses as IPv6 PI. > > > > but there is no way to stop it from becoming so. > > Other than by issuing bogon lists, where the ULA-centra prefixes will be > noted. You certainly can't stop it or any other type of ipv6 address > from becoming PI. But you can stop it from being useful PI space, which > is all you need to do. > > Nick you, my friend, have an over inflated view of your ability to effect "useful" for others. imho of course. --bill
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] article about IPv6 vs firewalls vs NAT in arstechnica (seen on slashdot)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]