[123610] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 enabled carriers?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (TJ)
Thu Mar 11 19:27:26 2010
From: "TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com>
To: "'NANOG'" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <71bfd60c1003111451g15b5e2f1qd4f66481ad58959d@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 19:25:36 -0500
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hmm, apologies - I was not explicit in calling out VZW; meant to, my bad and
thanks for pointing it out!
Posting from phone, while distracted . less than ideal.
/TJ
From: TJ [mailto:trejrco@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 17:52
To: Christopher Morrow
Subject: Re: IPv6 enabled carriers?
VZW's LTE HW spec's mandate IPv6 support, that's why it is relevant.
Yes, VZW - thought I made that pretty clear in my post ... (cough)also not
verizon residential(cough)
Yes, there are other carriers - none of which appear to have the level of
coverage I need in the areas I spend my time. Or the Droid ;).
(Although a strong IPv6 rollout might convince me ...)
/TJ
On Mar 11, 2010 5:05 PM, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:54 PM, TJ <trejrco@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:01 PM, ...
how so exactly?? LTE is really just a 'last mile' tech... whether it's
v4 or v6 doesnt' seem to matter (to the fact that it's LTE)
> Another nit - They are also blocking Protocol41 on their EV-DO network.
<cough>vzw not vzb</cough>
> While this is a 'noble, if poorly thought out, effort' to prevent IPv6
from
> impacting their cel...
there are other carriers ya know?
