IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v4v6interim] You have been dugg!

"TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com> Mon, 13 October 2008 22:57 UTC

Return-Path: <v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: v4v6interim-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-v4v6interim-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88503A68E7; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:57:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F2D3A68E7 for <v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 NyoFCLxAlKGj for <v4v6interim@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:57:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com (wr-out-0506.google.com [64.233.184.232]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEAEF3A67A7 for <v4v6interim@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:57:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c49so1104852wra.17 for <v4v6interim@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:references :in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=5fKt4T40NUn2RlUdVfcrM4aBH9/4HtCUIPjmtPHc6zo=; b=j+24cof2qqIB2YVox77MQz4p7W6DTAs17JVWuNXp0HGI6Sd5vPFzaSoaugklgHrkjV N0PoTpf/jnrOMJ+quK9N8fS20WS4tzUnknjSDIsbyZfg4JeeppRx2cEH/C8v9niuy/BE siAFbOYHs411Ag1ZiRKfZQedCDCtrcB+T85EA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; b=ibKST2ks38Ner9JUnDCtBbGN7/GOfK90JQZ1wmFtqj6XbXyLCQYTw9reEwzmjN9GSM PKsDxQ3MlBlfFeCBvgwQy4KFaV8prMdEI84Dv8GWFcOcZ3f8ZKwf8GxQX5i2c8x2kcJR CKREcFcSaRLvrCqVSk4Bz113KSI5rpSnXXxdA=
Received: by 10.101.67.11 with SMTP id u11mr6594654ank.88.1223938686570; Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:58:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Lapci010 (pool-96-231-157-91.washdc.fios.verizon.net [96.231.157.91]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c29sm18618988anc.13.2008.10.13.15.58.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:58:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: TJ <trejrco@gmail.com>
To: v4v6interim@ietf.org
References: <732E532B-97C7-465C-BBE0-FD1B442DB21E@muada.com> <7E414550-E1C7-46BB-A7AD-D4F128903046@cisco.com> <290F8ED4-F51C-429F-9DD6-F904996A1CED@muada.com> <8094EF71-2475-48B5-8F26-F926769CBF91@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <8094EF71-2475-48B5-8F26-F926769CBF91@cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:58:06 -0400
Message-ID: <003001c92d87$27fdf740$77f9e5c0$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Acktgl3UjxzpDdQ+QrKzYLSvFQLbuwABJfBg
Content-Language: en-us
Subject: Re: [v4v6interim] You have been dugg!
X-BeenThere: v4v6interim@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of coexistence topics for the 01-Oct-2008 v4-v6 coexistence interim meeting <v4v6interim.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim>, <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/v4v6interim>
List-Post: <mailto:v4v6interim@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim>, <mailto:v4v6interim-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: v4v6interim-bounces@ietf.org

>I disagree. The discussion of /48 vs /56 vs /60 vs /64 comes to mind.

That is a discussion more about block allocation (aka prefix delegation) vs
a single subnet's size, yes?


/TJ

_______________________________________________
v4v6interim mailing list
v4v6interim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v4v6interim

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status