[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 ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Sat Oct 5 19:03:21 CEST 2019
Hi, On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 04:13:48PM +0000, Michel Py wrote: > > Nick Hilliard wrote : > > The cost of making 240/4 usable is to update every device on the planet, > > including legacy ipv4 stacks. > > No it is not. It costs nothing to the Internet, it only costs to those who chose to use it as private address space. > More FUD. It's not "private address space" unless designated as such. But yeah, if only used internally, you just need to upgrade all those OS/2, Win95, WinXP systems, old internal routers, ... :-) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20191005/f49db18f/attachment.sig>
- 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 ]