Comments for Deploying IPv6 http://www.deployingipv6.net The authors of O Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:26:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 Comment on Address selection by dwmalone http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2007/01/12/address-selection/#comment-6951 dwmalone Tue, 01 Apr 2008 14:01:16 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2007/01/12/address-selection/#comment-6951 I don't believe that configurable address selection is part of the default Linux kernel at the moment. AFAIK, the USAGI guys do have a patch though. I don’t believe that configurable address selection is part of the default Linux kernel at the moment. AFAIK, the USAGI guys do have a patch though.

]]> Comment on Address selection by zaf http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2007/01/12/address-selection/#comment-4184 zaf Thu, 05 Jul 2007 01:04:37 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2007/01/12/address-selection/#comment-4184 So I was just recently looking at the ietf website, and noticed the 2610: address, and googled the 2610: prefix, and came across your site. After reading it, I thought, that explains a bit. You wouldn't happen to know if linux has a similar policy tool? So I was just recently looking at the ietf website, and noticed the 2610: address, and googled the 2610: prefix, and came across your site. After reading it, I thought, that explains a bit.

You wouldn’t happen to know if linux has a similar policy tool?

]]> Comment on Book Errata by Nicolás Ruiz http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/16/book-errata/#comment-21 Nicolás Ruiz Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:11:44 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/16/book-errata/#comment-21 Figure 3-7. According to the labels, the arrows must point from the Correspondent node to the Mobile Home (and probably from the correspondent node to the home agent too). Figure 3-7. According to the labels, the arrows must point from the Correspondent node to the Mobile Home (and probably from the correspondent node to the home agent too).

]]> Comment on Book Errata by Nicolás Ruiz http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/16/book-errata/#comment-20 Nicolás Ruiz Tue, 08 Nov 2005 18:07:25 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/16/book-errata/#comment-20 Apparently ISATAP has gone from being a draft (mentioned in page 73 of the book as draft-ietf-ngtrans-isatap-22.txt) to being an RFC (ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4214.txt) Apparently ISATAP has gone from being a draft (mentioned in page 73 of the book as draft-ietf-ngtrans-isatap-22.txt) to being an RFC (ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc4214.txt)

]]> Comment on Addressing draft cements /64s by Ruxor http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/03/29/addressing-draft-cements-64s/#comment-9 Ruxor Thu, 01 Sep 2005 19:22:19 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/03/29/addressing-draft-cements-64s/#comment-9 I don't see how such a minimal prefix length can be mandated: how, exactly, are things supposed to "break" if you use a prefix longer than /64, or how, exactly, do you think existing implementations (which work fine with such prefixes) should be modified? I mean, exactly what you call the "identifier" part of the address is a matter of convention, if I decide to handcraft (non-globally-unique) interfaces starting with 0001 on one subnet and 0002 on the other, I don't see why I couldn't, or shouldn't be able, to route on this part of the identifier, thereby introducing a longer prefix... I don’t see how such a minimal prefix length can be mandated: how, exactly, are things supposed to “break” if you use a prefix longer than /64, or how, exactly, do you think existing implementations (which work fine with such prefixes) should be modified? I mean, exactly what you call the “identifier” part of the address is a matter of convention, if I decide to handcraft (non-globally-unique) interfaces starting with 0001 on one subnet and 0002 on the other, I don’t see why I couldn’t, or shouldn’t be able, to route on this part of the identifier, thereby introducing a longer prefix…

]]> Comment on Protocol Redundancy by David Malone http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/07/02/protocol-redundancy/#comment-8 David Malone Thu, 11 Aug 2005 08:58:35 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/07/02/protocol-redundancy/#comment-8 Thanks - We're glad that you enjoyed it! Thanks - We’re glad that you enjoyed it!

]]> Comment on Protocol Redundancy by Richard Bejtlich http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/07/02/protocol-redundancy/#comment-7 Richard Bejtlich Thu, 11 Aug 2005 03:50:05 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/07/02/protocol-redundancy/#comment-7 I loved your book. Access my review <a hREF="http://taosecurity.blogspot.com/2005/08/review-of-ipv6-network-administration.html">here</a>. Thank you. I loved your book. Access my review here. Thank you.

]]> Comment on Google IPv6 by Proinnsias http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/04/04/google-ipv6/#comment-5 Proinnsias Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:59:21 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/04/04/google-ipv6/#comment-5 Pity really that google aren't listing it on their DNS yet :( Pity really that google aren’t listing it on their DNS yet :(

]]> Comment on SSH X forwarding by Steve McCormack http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/17/ssh-x-forwarding/#comment-2 Steve McCormack Mon, 17 Jan 2005 15:44:18 +0000 http://www.deployingipv6.net/index.php/archives/2005/01/17/ssh-x-forwarding/#comment-2 Look forward to further postings on this blog. Look forward to further postings on this blog.

]]>