NANOG 40 agenda posted
Chris L. Morrow
christopher.morrow at verizonbusiness.com
Tue May 29 18:33:15 UTC 2007
On Tue, 29 May 2007 Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 14:34:59 -0000, "Chris L. Morrow" said:
> > On Tue, 29 May 2007, John Curran wrote:
> > > This changeover will not: 1) Fix the routing problem
> > > inherent with present locator/endpoint binding, nor
> > > 2) solve your favorite fib/rib/cam/convergence limit,
> > > nor 3) make the infrastructure inherently either
> > > easier to operate or more secure.
> > but ipv6 is more secure, yes? :) (no it is not)
> Does the relative security of IVp4 and IPv6 *really* matter on the same Internet
> that has Vint Cerf's 140 million pwned machines on it?
was the ":)" not enough: "I'm joking" ??
> Just askin', ya know?
some people do think that it does... they would be wrong, but they don't
More information about the NANOG