login
Header Space

 
 

Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Good Good <goodgood.51@...>
Cc: <jb@...>, <cjeker@...>, <misc@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2008 - 5:15 pm

Good Good wrote:

talk to them again.  a /64 is plain stupid.  you need a /48 and there
is no reason why they don't give it to you.

IPv6 solves exactly this problem:  not enough IPv4 addresses.

These idiots are still living in their very limited IPv4 world and
thinking...

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Good Good, (Tue Jan 8, 4:52 pm)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Simon Vallet, (Wed Jan 9, 5:44 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stéphane Chausson, (Wed Jan 9, 6:04 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stuart Henderson, (Wed Jan 9, 7:16 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Simon Vallet, (Wed Jan 9, 6:59 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Claudio Jeker, (Wed Jan 9, 7:10 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Olivier Mehani, (Wed Jan 9, 6:45 am)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Marc Balmer, (Tue Jan 8, 5:15 pm)
Re: NAT IPV4 and bridge only IPV6, Stuart Henderson, (Tue Jan 8, 7:16 pm)
speck-geostationary