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

RE: v4 side unmodifiable

To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>, Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@simphalempin.com>
Subject: RE: v4 side unmodifiable
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@windows.microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 12:51:23 -0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
In-reply-to: <4739FCE5-2C63-4FFE-B456-D7ECF4F5221C@muada.com>
References: <9B487B6D-52C9-4FEA-A326-E415A271F756@muada.com> <200712072014.03898.rdenis@simphalempin.com> <4739FCE5-2C63-4FFE-B456-D7ECF4F5221C@muada.com>

> The case I'm thinking about is a service that is somewhere up there in
> the top 10000 destinations on the web.

Why are we worried about that? The top 10000 destinations are typically located in big server farms, with a rich set of equipment. If there appears to be a sizeable IPv6 development, these 10000 top sites will become someone's business opportunity. There may be some form of conversion going on, but most likely it will be located somewhere in the server farm, e.g. some upgraded version of the current load balancers and firewalls.

-- Christian Huitema

References:
- v4 side unmodifiable
  - From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
- Re: v4 side unmodifiable
  - From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <rdenis@simphalempin.com>
- Re: v4 side unmodifiable
  - From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>

Prev by Date: Re: Translation versus tunneling document
Next by Date: Re: IPv6<->IPv4 address translation is not NAT?
Previous by thread: Re: v4 side unmodifiable
Next by thread: Re: v4 side unmodifiable
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread