>Considering that RFC1918 says nothing about IPv at all, That may technically be true, but it does explicitly reference IPv4 addresses. Oh, and when RFC1918 (or more correctly, RFC1597) was written, "IP", "TCP/IP", etc. all directly meant IPv4. (RFC1597 @ 03/94 ... RFC1883 @ 12/95)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Seth Mattinen
- RE: v6 & DSL / Ca... TJ
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Jack Bates
- RE: v6 & DSL / Ca... TJ
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Mark Andrews
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Matthew Kaufman
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... John Osmon
- RE: v6 & DSL / Ca... TJ
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Matthew Palmer
- Re: v6 & DSL / Ca... Valdis . Kletnieks
- RE: v6 & DSL / Ca... TJ
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable ... Mohacsi Janos
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private u... Nathan Ward
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private u... Brandon Butterworth
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private u... Roger Marquis
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Priv... Jack Bates
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private u... Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private u... Scott Howard