Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:13:54 +0100 From: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@FreeBSD.org> To: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>, Hiroki Sato <hrs@allbsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for testers: RFC 5569 (6rd) support in stf(4) Message-ID: <89382820-E423-432E-8346-ADABB9FEED7F@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4CA26BB7.2090907@FreeBSD.org> References: <20100923.053236.231630719.hrs@allbsd.org> <4CA26BB7.2090907@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28 Sep 2010, at 23:27, Doug Barton wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 9/22/2010 1:32 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > | Hello, > | > | Can anyone try a patch for adding 6rd (RFC 5569) support to stf(4)? > > Well I don't want to be "Mr. Negativity," but I'd like to suggest that > adding this support is the wrong way to go. STF and teredo are > transition mechanisms, and we're currently knee-deep (well maybe > ankle-deep) in the deployment of IPv6. This is only going to pick up > steam in the next few years given the impending run-out of the free /8s > in the IANA pool. I disagree with you and I want to see this going in. Regards, -- Rui Paulo
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?89382820-E423-432E-8346-ADABB9FEED7F>