Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10

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

To: "John Levine" <johnl@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10
From: Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2017 13:45:44 +0900
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20161231231811.45008.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <eb7127f9-4f29-325b-11cb-9accdf300b4c@gmail.com> <20161231231811.45008.qmail@ary.lan>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/24.5 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

> Windows Phone  0.3%
> Apple iOS     12.5%
> Android       86.8%
> 
> It appears that not implementing DHCPv6 is the key to world
> domination.  Next question, please?

you are confusing coincidence with causality

Follow-Ups:
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10
  - From: Brian E Carpenter

References:
- Re: IPv10 (Temp. name IPmix) (draft-omar-ipv10-00.txt).
  - From: Brian E Carpenter
- Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10
  - From: John Levine

Prev by Date: Re: multihoming, was IPv10
Next by Date: Re: Predictable Internet Time
Previous by thread: Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10
Next by thread: Re: why v6 still isn't ready, was IPv10
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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