Level 3 blames Internet slowdowns on ISPs' refusal to upgrade networks | Ars Technica
fergdawgster at mykolab.com
Thu Mar 20 22:04:25 UTC 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
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 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Warren Bailey
>> <wbailey at 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.
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/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the NANOG