<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.28.1">
</HEAD>
<BODY>
This would be great! <BR>
Maybe Mike would consider doing a talk on IPv6 at April's LinuxFest at ITT<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
<B>From</B>: Geoffrey <<A HREF="mailto:Geoffrey%20%3clists@serioustechnology.com%3e">lists@serioustechnology.com</A>><BR>
<B>Reply-to</B>: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts - Yes! We run Linux! <ale@ale.org><BR>
<B>To</B>: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts - Yes! We run Linux! <<A HREF="mailto:Atlanta%20Linux%20Enthusiasts%20-%20Yes!%20We%20run%20Linux!%20%3cale@ale.org%3e">ale@ale.org</A>><BR>
<B>Subject</B>: Re: [ale] uptime<BR>
<B>Date</B>: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:30:52 -0400<BR>
<BR>
<PRE>
Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 18:44 -0400, Geoffrey wrote:
>> Michael H. Warfield wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 16:46 -0400, Geoffrey wrote:
>>>> Michael H. Warfield wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 14:52 -0400, Geoffrey wrote:
>>>>>> Sean Kilpatrick wrote:
>>>>>>> And the last time you upgraded the kernel and libraries, and installed
>>>>>>> needed security patches was . . . ?
>>>>>> Too long. Internal box, you can't get to it from there. I promise. ;)
>>>>> Make sure nobody brings up any IPv6 routing on you. You could be in for
>>>>> a REAL surprise. You don't get any warning. Even if you are deep
>>>>> behind an IPv4 NAT.
>>>> This is a box here at home. No IPv6 running on any of my boxes.
>>> Make sure you don't have any Mac's or the Mac AirPort Express access
>>> points either. Oh, and if you've got any Wifi access points running
>>> dd-wrt, you might check those versions as well. You never can
>>> tell. :-)
>>>
>>> Google discovered an unexpectedly high number of IPv6 users from the
>>> United States, placing the US in 5th place for IPv6 adoption. Most of
>>> that (but not all of that) was from Mac books and Mac Airport Express
>>> AP's that have IPv6 and 6to4 enabled by default. And yes, they do
>>> advertise and yes they do route other devices. As time goes on, this is
>>> going to become more and more common. Even Comcast is opening up a Beta
>>> program for IPv6. It's not if. It's when. You can expect more and
>>> more consumer NAT devices and AP's to be picking up the banner. Doesn't
>>> cost them a thing to support it.
>
>> But I would think that's a good thing. Just be aware. :)
>
> Oh, it is. It very much so is. Just be aware that all of your
> previously unreachable (on IPv4) systems will now have a globally
> addressable address in the IPv6 global unicast address set.
I'm thinking it's getting to the time where we need Mike to do
a(nother?) IPv6 presentation? :)
I think most folks think it's simply a re-implementation of IPv4 with
'more real estate.'
</PRE>
<BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>