[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 ]