[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 ]
Jens Link
lists at quux.de
Sun Oct 6 18:02:39 CEST 2019
Carlos Friaças via ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg at ripe.net> writes: > Hi, > > Fine, i get it: It's not only Microsoft and Cisco. I don't think Microsoft is involved how GitHub operates it's network. > But, imho, such list of 'gaps' is very, very useful! See my presentations. the update slide to my last presentation would look like this (in the source} \begin{frame} \frameritle{Update RIPE 77} \end{frame} What would such a list accomplish? I put answers in three categories: 1 - No answer at all, e.g. Twitter 2 - Your call is very important to us. We are working on it. 3 - Got away we'll never do IPv6 I think that 1 and 3 are the most honest answers you'll get at that 2 is just a polite form of answer 3. BTW: You'll will often get answers including the phrase "You are the first one to ask." Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Delbrueckstr. 41 | 12051 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink at quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- 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 ]