Hello from Gregg C Levine writing for myself
I've been monitoring the discussions regarding IPv6, and I have some of my
own to offer, comments that is.
How many of you attend the continuing education seminars that Cisco
provides? I do. It happens that, yes they do have such hardware, and yes it
is expensive, but probably not as much as you want to think. Also, most of
the opinions that were posted here, are both right, and wrong, for all of
the same reasons. Renumbering for example: Forget it. It really is not a
problem, unless you are that guy who does it, at the ISP level. My ISP is
aware of it, (IPv6), but at the dynamically addressed, level, they do not
want to try it, for diallups, which is what I use currently. I should say,
that being aware is the only thing they are, they have not told me directly
of any plans to participate.
--
Gregg C Levine mailto:hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net
"Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"Trust in the Force, Luke, and wait." Obi-Wan Kenobi
"The Force will be with you. Always. " Obi-Wan Kenobi
"May the Force be with you." "And to you" Anonymous
(This company dedicates this e-mail to the memory of Gen'l Obi-Wan Kenobi
(Perhaps the greatest of all of the Jedi Knights))
> -----Original Message-----
> From: current-users-owner@netbsd.org
> [mailto:current-users-owner@netbsd.org]On Behalf Of Jared D. McNeill
> Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 4:46 PM
> To: Feico Dillema
> Cc: current-users@netbsd.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 Comment
>
>
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2000, Feico Dillema wrote:
> > I am currently assisting as a consultant setting up a broadband ISP
> > (24 hour bi-directional 10Mbs and maybe 100Mbs or more in the
> far future,
> > i.e.  a few years from now, so no pathetic ADSL or shared-bandwidth
> > Cable ;), requiring basically all the bandwidth current and future
> > technology can provide in its core network. NAT a feasible option in
> > such a network? NATPT? I don't think so. Why? Simply, because Cisco
> > (or any for that matter) doesn't sell equipment that can do such a
> > thing at multi-Gbs speed. And even if they did it would be
> > outragiously expensive. And this type of network is growing at an
>
> I'm using a similar service (24 hr bi-directional 10mbps), and my ISP uses
> NAT. Everything's working fine, and the speeds are great.
>
> Jared
>
>