Re: [71attendees] IPv6 Jabber Identity server anyone?

Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com> Tue, 11 March 2008 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <71attendees-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-71attendees-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-71attendees-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F278D28C59D; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.164
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.027, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uTf-u1TbA4Mf; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 030C528C614; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:24:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: 71attendees@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 71attendees@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B434C28C593 for <71attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YOGaYZdH+TMS for <71attendees@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:24:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A2223A6B03 for <71attendees@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 13:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,482,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="1340594"
Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 11 Mar 2008 16:21:38 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m2BKLck6015356; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:21:38 -0400
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m2BKLCui025339; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:21:36 GMT
Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:21:33 -0400
Received: from [130.129.82.41] ([10.82.216.231]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:21:33 -0400
Message-Id: <BEF61FC5-9086-4EF8-94EF-342CB4DCF5A2@cisco.com>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=E4ltstr=F6m?= <paf@cisco.com>
To: Michael Graff <michael_graff@isc.org>
In-Reply-To: <200803111011.09512.michael_graff@isc.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:21:31 -0400
References: <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155708508D@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <200803111011.09512.michael_graff@isc.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2008 20:21:33.0627 (UTC) FILETIME=[7FC930B0:01C883B5]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=563; t=1205266898; x=1206130898; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=paf@cisco.com; z=From:=20=3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Patrik_F=3DE4ltstr=3DF6m?=3D=20<p af@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[71attendees]=20IPv6=20Jabber=20Identit y=20server=20anyone? |Sender:=20 |To:=20Michael=20Graff=20<michael_graff@isc.org>; bh=n1xYQfthMy476eFdBOnqrcACHCNmr1E25+8ciPHl2eM=; b=DgqelEApbYUULaU4TQ8v75xQUbHptne3w8pTPU3D7+zkHNruG508/T/zB0 C4kX+SfIpxERQ9li0Bg8umEzXXlSyVhPOKg0nu0LQ4/4a4L6UlkKKwrASgeH ignQpmenbW;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=paf@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: 71attendees@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [71attendees] IPv6 Jabber Identity server anyone?
X-BeenThere: 71attendees@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for IETF Meeting 71 attendees <71attendees.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/71attendees>, <mailto:71attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:71attendees@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:71attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/71attendees>, <mailto:71attendees-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: 71attendees-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: 71attendees-bounces@ietf.org

On 11 mar 2008, at 11.11, Michael Graff wrote:

> This is one reason I don't think the no-v4 experiment is really of  
> use right
> now.

I think the experiment is very valuable. Not because things will work,  
but more because people (like myself) actually start to ensure that  
IPv6 exists and works. I have too many things to do, but the fact IPv4  
will be gone I actually ensured I have IPv6 image on my router at  
home, IPv6 connectivity etc. It would (still) have been too low  
priority if this test would not have happend.

    Patrik

_______________________________________________
71attendees mailing list
71attendees@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/71attendees