|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]
On 11/18/04 10:29 AM, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:18:22 EST, Christian Kuhtz said: > >> So, again, somebody says they're selling it.. And without wanting to sound >> like a flame.. what volume of native, non-tunnel IPv6 traffic do you see and >> what applications is it? Could you throw those of us a bone who are still >> scratching our heads as to what business cases support this? ;) > > The point is that Randy was wrong when he said there weren't any v6 ISPs > in 2002, because at least some were doing it a year before that. I understand that, but that wasn't my point. What business needs are there for IPv6 today (or near future) that would want somebody to buy a native IPv6 pipe? > For *THAT* matter, I've heard a lot of people over on the main IETF list > in the last week or so stating that SMTP is only 1-2% of many places' total > bandwidth usage. So why don't we all just cut *THAT* off because there's > no business case to support *THAT* either? :) Apples and oranges, but a worthy April 1 proposal ;) The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. 162
|