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/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] PA ??? life after death
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PA ??? life after death
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PA ??? life after death
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Stary Bezpiek
stary.bezpiecznik at gmail.com
Fri Mar 8 14:02:34 CET 2019
W dniu 08.03.2019 o 13:19, Martin Huněk pisze: > Post scriptum: IPv6 is not harder or slower to deploy than IPv4. If you would > like to make IPv6-only network without transition mechanisms from scratch, it > would be easier to make than IPv4-only. You wouldn't need CGN and also HA > would be much easier (multiple routers on segment and so on). Technically the > IPv6 should be faster, allows more freedom in network architecture and should > require less logic in the network itself. It is mainly political problem, not > technical. > Do not mix politics to IPv6, please. It's still lot of technical problems with IPv6 - the main one is dealing IPv6 by software (processors) instead of hardware. The first-hand example: Mikrotik. Lot of HW offload functions are only for IPv4. Same is with some Cisco's, or other randomly pointed devices. Amen. -- stary.bezpiek
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PA ??? life after death
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] PA ??? life after death
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]