Companies using public IP space owned by others for internal routing

Ca By cb.list6 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 20 21:17:23 CST 2017


On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:01 PM Oliver O'Boyle <oliver.oboyle at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Agreed. There now. We need cheap, open source, options for widespread
> adoption.
>

http://jool.mx/en/index.html

Free open source nat64


> Oliver
>
> On Dec 20, 2017 12:51, "Michael Crapse" <michael at wi-fiber.io> wrote:
>
> > +1 for Nat64. dual stack is just keeping ipv4 around longer than it needs
> > to be
> >
> > On 19 December 2017 at 18:50, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > On Dec 19, 2017, at 07:39 , Livingood, Jason <
> > > Jason_Livingood at comcast.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 12/18/17, 2:36 PM, "NANOG on behalf of Harald Koch" <
> > > nanog-bounces at nanog.org on behalf of chk at pobox.com> wrote:
> > > >> They could use IPv6. I mean, if the mobile phone companies can
> figure
> > > it out, surely an ISP can...
> > > >
> > > > Except for cases when it is impossible or impractical to update
> > software
> > > on a great number of legacy devices…
> > > >
> > > > JL
> > > >
> > > >
> > > Yeah, in those cases, they should use IPv6 + NAT64 or similar
> mechanism.
> > >
> > > Owen
> > >
> > >
> >
>


More information about the NANOG mailing list