[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Automatic tunnels

To: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
Subject: Re: Automatic tunnels
From: Tim Chown <tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:23:10 +0100
In-reply-to: <679A4C54-C1A5-11D7-958B-000393A638B2@kurtis.pp.se>
Mail-followup-to: v6ops@ops.ietf.org
References: <01f501c35208$5ad99210$870a0a0a@consulintel.es> <679A4C54-C1A5-11D7-958B-000393A638B2@kurtis.pp.se>
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 11:16:58AM +0200, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> 
> The alternative is dual-stack, but if I would be a carrier I would be 
> very reluctant to roll-out dual-stack software (or at least to activate 
> it) on my routers.

I'm curious, what do you see as the main reasons for this?

Tim

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Automatic tunnels
  - From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
- Re: Automatic tunnels
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>

References:
- Re: Automatic tunnels
  - From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
- Re: Automatic tunnels
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>

Prev by Date: Re: Automatic tunnels
Next by Date: Re: Automatic tunnels
Previous by thread: Re: Automatic tunnels
Next by thread: Re: Automatic tunnels
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread