On Mon, 22 Nov 2004, Peter Ford wrote: > > > Hi Tony, > > Your enclosed feature comparison list is a fine list. However, the sooner the residential gateway feature set is expanded to cover support of tunneling IPv6 running on top IPv4 as a bearer, the faster you will see IPv6 deployed. Why build in a dependancy on the carriers moving to IPv6 when you don't have to. > Ok. I'll bite. Who do you propose to tunnel to by default in all these embedded devices? Do you give users a choice of tunnel brokers? Does it work "out of the box?" Do you give them one address, or how large an allocation, or what? Scott > Here is the SAT test question related to IPv6 transition: > > Q: IPv6 is to IPv4 as > > a) IPv4 to X.25 > > b) IPv4 to ISDN > > c) IPv4 to ATM > > d) all of the above > > > > regards, peterf > > > > sleekfreak pirate broadcast http://sleekfreak.ath.cx:81/ _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf