[address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Thu Oct 18 21:26:19 CEST 2007
* michael dillon: >> This all comes down to economics. Adding IPv6 capabilities >> to CPE access devices costs money, and CPE devices are often >> chosen purely on the basis of cost alone. Ergo, IPv6 >> capability is bad for business, if you manufacture CPE boxen. > > IPv6 is a software upgrade. Including IPsec? Doubt it, some of the CPUs barely manage to run PPPoE.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] AW: [ipv6-wg] DRAFT: RIPE Community Resolution on IPv4 Depletion and Deployment of IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]