[141155] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Microsoft's participation in World IPv6 day
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (=?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTmljb2xsZQ==)
Sun Jun 5 20:48:06 2011
In-Reply-To: <20110606001819.D3B94105946C@drugs.dv.isc.org>
From: =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgTmljb2xsZQ==?= <jerome@ceriz.fr>
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 02:46:59 +0200
To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
2011/6/6 Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org>:
> There is no reason that they can't do a similar thing to move
> customers who are doing things that break with LSN out from behind
> the LSN.
Oh, you're right, they'll surelly do that. But not in time, and not for fre=
e.
LSN is beeing actively implemented in the core network of several
ISPs, and most didn't yet consider it as optional. Nor are ready for
v6 connectivity to residential customers, though.
For users behind a forced NAT (no way to disable it on the CPE) or
LSN, the only way out is still tunneling. Talking about bandwidth and
infrastructure waste...
--=20
J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Nicolle
