[162302] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Taylor)
Mon Apr 8 15:51:29 2013
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:48:43 -0400
From: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <B14A62A57AB87D45BB6DD7D9D2B78F0B1160CD2F@xmb-rcd-x06.cisco.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
In what sense do you mean that? The end-user IPv6 prefix certainly ties
IPv4 and IPv6 together, hence the interest in the Light-Weight IPv4 over
IPv6 alternative.
Tom
On 08/04/2013 3:13 PM, Rajiv Asati (rajiva) wrote:
> Chris,
>
> UmmmŠ you mean the IPv6 and IPv4 inter-dependency when you say IP
> encumbered?
>
> If so, the answer is Yes. v6 addressing doesn't need to change to
> accommodate this IPv4 A+P encoding.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Rajiv
>
...
