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

Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]

Subject: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 11:58:22 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <CAC1-dtkp2rjm=7tARPJNCXjky11u0S_R7xtumSzJ-M4tiNz=vg@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]>

a good number of us use that kinky /10 behind home nats and encourage
everyone to do so.  it was a sick deal and should be treated as such,
just more 1918.

randy

Follow-Ups:
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann)

References:
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: cgrundemann at gmail.com (Chris Grundemann)
- Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
  - From: mansaxel at besserwisser.org (Måns Nilsson)

Prev by Date: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
Next by Date: CLEC and FTTP H.248/Megaco
Previous by thread: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
Next by thread: Shared Transition Space VS. BGP Next Hop [was: Re: Best practices IPv4/IPv6 BGP (dual stack)]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread