[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 ]