Re: multihoming, was IPv10

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Mark Andrews <marka@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 11:42:10 +0900
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20161230023227.52CE25E161B5@rock.dv.isc.org>
References: <20161229162721.34651.qmail@ary.lan> <20161230015709.EF91C5E15F13@rock.dv.isc.org> <alpine.OSX.2.11.1612292057480.38763@ary.qy> <20161230023227.52CE25E161B5@rock.dv.isc.org>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

> We do have the technology to provide a CERT to every customer.  See
> SIDR.

see frequent residential address reassignment

Follow-Ups:
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10
  - From: John Levine

References:
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10
  - From: John Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10
  - From: Mark Andrews
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10
  - From: John R Levine
- Re: multihoming, was IPv10
  - From: Mark Andrews

Prev by Date: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
Next by Date: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
Previous by thread: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
Next by thread: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [IETF Annoucements] [IETF] [IP Storage] [Yosemite News] [Linux SCTP] [Linux Newbies] [Fedora Users]