| At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
FFII Protests European Software Patent Decision
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 4 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Europeans Do Not Lead, They Follow Like Sheep
One can not conclude that an old, densely populated place on Earth is NET-literate. Europe is a good example. They follow the the dictates of the ISOC and ICANN and the IETF. Look at their brain-washed following of the IPv6 schemes.
European government leaders see that their European technologists are immature and third-world.
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current /msg31439.html Here is a typical example:
At 12:27 PM +0200 9/27/04, Francis Dupont wrote:
- I don't believe the protocol works with NATs using global addresses
on both sides (yes, this is a stupid way to use NATs but one can say
that using NATs is already stupid :-)
If you mean "non-private" on both sides, there is a very good reason for such NATs (well, if you believe that there is any reason for NATs). You have a Class C from your ISP and have hard-wired values in dozens of boxes, have gotten certificates for some of the IP addresses, have hard-wired the IP address in other places, and so on. One day they call and say "we've changed your IP range just because we can". Tossing everything behind a NAT using the old addresses keeps everything working until you can handle the transition.
--Paul Hoffman, Director --VPN Consortium
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
 |
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg01546. html
Re: IPv6 support for com/net zones on October 19, 2004
* From: Daniel Roesen
* Date: Mon Sep 27 07:30:47 2004
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 02:10:58PM -0400, Matt Larson wrote: > We would welcome opportunities for IPv6 tunnels to further improve our > connectivity. Please contact ipv6-peering@verisign.com if you're > interested.
Please do NOT do any long-haul tunneling! See the MIPP document for elaboration on reasoning. I can understand tactic short-haul tunnels to actually provide any connectivity, but please no long-haul tunnels which really distort global v6 routing decisions. Seek native transits in US and be done with it.
Thanks for your consideration.
Best regards, Daniel
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
 |
echo 15 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_default_ttl
Regional IP Address Block Registries are a really bad idea.
RIPE Does Not Understand Their /8s Are Useless and are reclaimed for use on U.S. broad-band networks.
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |

Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|