[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
Fri Oct 11 14:03:53 CEST 2019
Hi, On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 01:46:16PM +0200, Philip Homburg wrote: > Maybe there is another question this working group can answer: > Does this working group recommend wifi deployments as NAT64? (of course > only NAT64, not paired with dual stack on another SSID) > - Is it recommended for a coffee shop or restaurant > - Is it recommended for an office lan, > - for a home situation > - for just a random conference? Given that doing dual-stack anywhere is "dual work", my recommendation for anything that needs proper monitoring would be "go single-stack if all possible". Which nowadays for "random visitor networks" can mean "NAT64+DNS64", given that this already nicely works in mobile networks and more and more "mobile internet usage" stuff is "iOS/Android clients or all-https" anyway. 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/20191011/efc98ac2/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 ]