North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
- From: Stephen Sprunk
- Date: Thu Jun 12 20:25:41 2003
Thus spake "David Barak" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> --- Stephen Sprunk <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Nearly every customer of mine has required IPv6 in
> > their RFPs for over a
> > year, but not a single one has turned it on even for
> > testing.
> Right, but it means that more network providers are
> having to offer some type of solution. This will
> enable Windows (or whatever) to have it on by default
> and actually have it work.
We can hope.
> Vendor C's issues with v6 are a problem, but they're
> not the only provider of core or edge gear...
> Also, even though their forwarding mechanisa are not
> completely functional, they do pass packets, so it'll
> work, just not be optimized.
When a 30Mpps IPv4 box falls back to <200kpps for IPv6, I don't think "not
completely functional" is an adequate description. To me, that falls into
the "not supported" category.