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]/
[ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Bjoern Buerger
b.buerger at penguin.de
Fri Oct 11 12:03:23 CEST 2019
* Philip Homburg (pch-ripeml at u-1.phicoh.com) [191011 09:31]: > >> Troopers runs their main conference wifi with NAT64. If I'm not > >> mistaken, so does FOSDEM. > > > >True. > >FOSDEM was Dualstack till 2013 and then switched to IPv6-only in 2014. > > FOSDEM is similar to the RIPE meeting in that they have both a dual stack > SSID and a NAT64 SSID. > > The difference is that FOSDEM promotes the NAT64 SSID as the main one and > the dual stack SSID as the fallback. Yes. Which is exactly what we ask for . Just switch the default and see what happens. https://blogs.cisco.com/developer/fosdem-2019-a-new-view-from-the-noc Bjørn
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Have we failed as IPv6 Working Group?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]