Sounds like a lot of 6 to 4 links to me.. ;) On 3/20/14, 3:04 PM, "Paul Ferguson" <fergdawgster@mykolab.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
Are carriers prepared to tunnel IPv4 traffic?
Carriers offering v6 is a novel idea, but the edge networks, enterprises, etc. are moving very fast.
- - ferg
On 3/20/2014 2:58 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Meh.. Some providers need to/should comply with the majority of the requirements. I¹d support ipv6 if I could and it wasn¹t a big deal, but my traffic originates from (usually) the ipv4 sphere. So unless all of these carriers start magically migrating to v6, I don¹t know that a lot of ³hosting² providers need to support it. It¹s a cool feature, but it¹s not something where I head for the door when they say I can¹t receive v6 traffic.
My .02.
On 3/20/14, 2:52 PM, "Jim Popovitch" <jimpop@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Warren Bailey <wbailey@satelliteintelligencegroup.com> wrote:
This email is the reason I spend money with digital ocean. :)
You should too.
uhh, no. It's the 21st century. I prefer to spend my money with those that, at a bare minimum, provide IPv6.
-Jim P.
- -- Paul Ferguson VP Threat Intelligence, IID PGP Public Key ID: 0x54DC85B2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iF4EAREIAAYFAlMrZekACgkQKJasdVTchbIXxwD+NLe6LUPJCbpKXGfevbPzAGWy BJu93FYH2Lfl9lMjTToA/2uGkqbI/ibO1eHH412gw4A6yLT7LLUoVK8yXwJiGRm1 =mbB3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----