site Search:


 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery






how-to block ads


 
Search Topic:
Uniqs:
268
Share Topic
Post a:
Post a:
AuthorAll Replies

amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

of course...

we still have enough ipv4 space that there shouldn't be a need to convert for no reason...

Sure, it'll be awhile, but everything should still be interoperable, so what's the rush?

How can we be "left behind" with boatloads of perfectly good address space?

Pascal

join:2003-11-16
Streamwood, IL
Reviews:
·Comcast

said by amungus:

How can we be "left behind" with boatloads of perfectly good address space?
Ummm, maybe because ipv4 users can't get to services in the new address space?

-Pascal

jjcrandall

join:2004-01-01
Salt Lake City, UT

reply to amungus
IPSec support is a good reason. Isn't all Ipv6 traffic supposed to be encrypted?



davidsmind
The Eye's Mind
Premium
join:2001-07-04
Canada

not all but it can be specified simply in the header field, as opposed to having to set up client-server services.


amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·AT&T DSL Service

reply to Pascal
ok. good point.

...I thought that one could simply re-mask an ipv4 address into version 6 though... so at that point, as long as the route(s) to those services are properly formatted, it should still work. Guess that would still mean some new hardware along the way...


Monday, 28-May 06:22:53 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.
Most commented news this week
Hot Topics