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/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] [members-discuss] manufacturers of routers and IPV6
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [members-discuss] manufacturers of routers and IPV6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [members-discuss] manufacturers of routers and IPV6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jen Linkova
furry13 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 23 12:34:33 CEST 2016
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Куприянов Роман <krb at enicom.ru> wrote: > Dear colleagues. > > Is there any possibility of the community affect the router manufacturer to implement the required functionality for the implementation of IPV6? Isn't it smth we are doing all the time? >From my experience vendors seldom implement features "just for fun" - usually there is a customer (or customers) asking for it. So yes, please keep telling your vendors "I need this and that IPv6 features in your equipment or I'm not buying it". P.S. Do you keep any specific vendor/required functionality in mind? > > ---------- > Best regards, > Kupriyanov Roman (ru.enigma) -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [members-discuss] manufacturers of routers and IPV6
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] [members-discuss] manufacturers of routers and IPV6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]