[143251] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Hart)
Thu Aug 4 01:07:51 2011
In-Reply-To: <3260859.439.1312403938080.JavaMail.root@benjamin.baylink.com>
From: Dave Hart <davehart@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 05:06:13 +0000
To: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: davehart_gmail_exchange_tee@davehart.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 20:38 UTC, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
>> From: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com>
>> > Did I mention I haven't implemented v6 yet? :-)
>>
>> No, you didn't. Perhaps you should spend some time learning about
>> it before you opine on how it should or should not be implemented.
>
> Perhaps. =C2=A0But that's a SHOULD, not a MUST; it's possible to make use=
ful
> observations without having every single implementation detail, quite oft=
en.
It's also possible to demonstrate you're talking out your ass with
IPv4 assumptions about IPv6 issues in front of a few thousand people
who aren't ignorant of IPv6.
Cheers,
Dave Hart
