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

Common operational misconceptions

Subject: Common operational misconceptions
From: steve.bertrand at gmail.com (Steve Bertrand)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 21:16:35 -0500
In-reply-to: <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B7B6C94@ex-mb-2.corp.atlasnetworks.us>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <8C26A4FDAE599041A13EB499117D3C286B7B6C94@ex-mb-2.corp.atlasnetworks.us>

On 2012.02.15 19:55, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>> IPv6 is operational.
>
> How is this a misconception?  It works fine for me...

Imagine an operator who is v6 ignorant, with a home provider who 
implements v6 half-assed, and tries to access a v6 site that has perhaps 
v6-only accessible nameservers, when their provider who 'offers' v6 has 
resolvers that operate only over v4.

*huge* misconception about the operational status of IPv6 (imho).

Steve

Follow-Ups:
- Common operational misconceptions
  - From: marka at isc.org (Mark Andrews)
- Common operational misconceptions
  - From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)

References:
- Common operational misconceptions
  - From: jtk at cymru.com (John Kristoff)
- Common operational misconceptions
  - From: mohta at necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
- Common operational misconceptions
  - From: nathan at atlasnetworks.us (Nathan Eisenberg)

Prev by Date: Common operational misconceptions
Next by Date: Common operational misconceptions
Previous by thread: Common operational misconceptions
Next by thread: Common operational misconceptions
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread