On Dec 26, 2011, at 1:23 46PM, Mark Radabaugh wrote:
> On 12/26/11 12:56 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>> On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 12:32:46 EST, Ray Soucy said:
>>> 2011/12/26 Masataka Ohta<mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>:
>>>> And, if RA is obsoleted, which is a point of discussion, there
>>>> is no reason to keep so bloated ND only for address resolution.
>>> By who? Sources please.
>>> A few people on NANOG complaining about RA is pretty far from deprecation
>>> of RA.
>> Especially when some of the biggest IPv6 networks out there are still using
>> it pretty heavily.
>>
>> (C''mon you guys, *deploy* already. It's pretty sad when people are arguing
>> about stuff like this, and a frikkin' cow college out in the boonies pushing
>> 300-400mbits/sec of IPv6 off-campus is still a "large" deployment. It's
>> embarassing for the industry as a whole)
>>
>>
> Find me some decent consumer CPE and I would be more than happy to deploy
> IPv6. So far the choices I have found for consumer routers are pathetic.
> A fair number of them still have IPv4 issues.
Not quite what you're asking for, but I was very pleasantly surprised to see
that some (at least) Brother printers support IPv6. Progress...
--Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
