IP6
Rev Adrian Kennard
I am working out how it would be practical to start offering
IP6 service. As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space
to our customers and route IP6 traffic. I am wondering about
asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6 support on ADSL
circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may be
one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central
I am ordering as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all
we need is an ADSL router that understands it.
I'd be interested in comments.
As an ISP we are already unusual in not having fixed limits
on IP4 assignments (you just have to follow RIPE rules). With
IP6 we would be giving each customer a million million million
million addresses as a minimum assignment...
--
_ Rev. Adrian Kennard, Andrews & Arnold Ltd
(_) _| _ . _ _ ADSL without the 12 month tie in. http://adsl.ms/
( )(_|( |(_|| ) ADSL + ISDN backup with fixed IP http://adsl.ms/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Need a good firewall: http://www.FireBrick.info/
Adrian Boliston
>
> Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
>
> I am working out how it would be practical to start offering
> IP6 service. As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space
> to our customers and route IP6 traffic. I am wondering about
> asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6 support on ADSL
> circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may be
> one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central
> I am ordering as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all
> we need is an ADSL router that understands it.
Do you know if my XyZel 642R will support IP6?
What about operating system support for it?
--
_. _|._.o _.._ |_ _ |o __-+- _ ._
(_](_][ |(_][ ) [_)(_)||_) | (_)[ )
http://www.boliston.com/
Todd Richardson
I can understand the need on the dirty side of the internet as address space
is at a premium, but on the local network the only possible benefit is to
prevent hacking, and as the router will translate IPv4 addresses to IPv6
this benefit is dubious at best.
On any local network using std 10. or 192.168. private address spaces no
network could adequately utilise the full address space available via IPv6
or for that matter exhaust a 10. addressing system, as any that could
would not be using any form of DSL to connect to the internet. I have worked
on some of the largest private networks in the world none of which would
unless pushed into it by Cisco, need IPv6, they either use 10. networks or
their own class B address spaces.
IPv6 has been a long time a coming, very few OS's and only some carrier
class network equipment supports it. Unless Murkysoft bring out a version of
Windows only supporting IPv6 I cannot see it's take up on LANs, MANs and
WANs.
As it is more complicated to understand and master than IPv4 and thus
breaches the fundamental KISS principle the take up of IPv6 may be a hell of
a long time coming.
So I am keen to hear why anyone would want to use IPv6 locally.
"Rev Adrian Kennard"
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:3D398C9D.5030008@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
unds.co.uk...
Rev Adrian Kennard
> Why would anyone have a requirement for IPv6 on their own local networks?
>
> I can understand the need on the dirty side of the internet as address space
> is at a premium, but on the local network the only possible benefit is to
> prevent hacking, and as the router will translate IPv4 addresses to IPv6
> this benefit is dubious at best.
>
> On any local network using std 10. or 192.168. private address spaces no
> network could adequately utilise the full address space available via IPv6
> or for that matter exhaust a 10. addressing system, as any that could
> would not be using any form of DSL to connect to the internet. I have worked
> on some of the largest private networks in the world none of which would
> unless pushed into it by Cisco, need IPv6, they either use 10. networks or
> their own class B address spaces.
>
> IPv6 has been a long time a coming, very few OS's and only some carrier
> class network equipment supports it. Unless Murkysoft bring out a version of
> Windows only supporting IPv6 I cannot see it's take up on LANs, MANs and
> WANs.
>
> As it is more complicated to understand and master than IPv4 and thus
> breaches the fundamental KISS principle the take up of IPv6 may be a hell of
> a long time coming.
>
> So I am keen to hear why anyone would want to use IPv6 locally.
I was not suggesting just locally - I was suggesting full public
IP6 address blocks assigned to customers and routed (over IP4
tunnel to us for now but maybe directly on the ADSL later)
in to the IP6 connected internet.
A quote from microsoft.com "We released the first version of our
implementation, MSRIPv6 1.0, early in 1998." I understand there
are 2000/NT/XP IP6 protocol stacks. It is certainly available for
linux, and as I understand it for MAC OS 10 and various versions
of unix. I agree that "microsoft, linux and mac" is only a "few
OS's" as you put it.
It will, eventually, happen, and I am trying to see what interest
there is for us trying to support customers that want IP6 now.
We are not the sort of ISP to sit around and do nothing waiting
for the world to pass us by - we try to be in the lead whenever
possible.
Rev Adrian Kennard
>...
> Do you know if my XyZel 642R will support IP6?
>
> What about operating system support for it?
There appears to be windows, linux and mac support to
various extents. I will try and get some more information.
I doubt the ZyXEL has a clue, but no doubt one day it
will in a future s/w release. FireBrick's don't have a
clue about IP6 yet, but that may change soon if I get the
time. If something on your IP4 network can translate, then
you could operate an IP6 LAN in parallel.
For now IP6 is in little bits interconnected over IP4 tunnels,
but gradually more and more ISPs will handle IP6 directly and
we will eventually be able to peer directly using IP6 and then IP4
will just be a small part of the IP6 address space with translation
at the borders of IP6 networks.
I am sure that for some time servers on the internet will be
dual addressed IP4/IP6, but eventually people will have purely
IP6 hosted equipment. The end user connections can actually move
to IP6 sooner as often the requirements for accessible IP addresses
are not quite the same (e.g. you could have an IP6 only SMTP mail
server as long as the backup mail server at the ISP talked IP4 and
IP6 so could relay from IP4 only senders).
The next few years should be interesting.
Ken Green
It's funny Adrian, I was only just thinking the other day about IPv6 and
asking whether you had any plans.
> Why would anyone have a requirement for IPv6 on their own local networks?
>
Well I suspect a significant propotion of A&As customer base are in the
technical side of the IT industry (Most so called ISPs don't understand
us).
Why do I want IPv6, well because I need to learn it.
There are adantages to running real addresses on both sides of the firewall.
Some protocols don't NAT very well, and as much as I'd like to force
developers to write stuff that does, I can't.
Sometimes I need to give people access to systems on my network, without
having them have access to anything else.
>
> I can understand the need on the dirty side of the internet as address space
> is at a premium, but on the local network the only possible benefit is to
> prevent hacking, and as the router will translate IPv4 addresses to IPv6
> this benefit is dubious at best.
If everything NAT's properly then there would probably be no need to IPv6
even on the outside.
>
>
> On any local network using std 10. or 192.168. private address spaces no
> network could adequately utilise the full address space available via IPv6
> or for that matter exhaust a 10. addressing system, as any that could
> would not be using any form of DSL to connect to the internet. I have worked
> on some of the largest private networks in the world none of which would
> unless pushed into it by Cisco, need IPv6, they either use 10. networks or
> their own class B address spaces.
If they were large, they would only have class Bs.
HP now has two class A's 15 & 16... some people even suggested that the
reason for buying Compaq was that there new numbering scheme was
running out of space, and likely to overflow their 15 address space, and
Compaq just happened to have the next obvious block of addresses:-)
>
>
> IPv6 has been a long time a coming, very few OS's and only some carrier
> class network equipment supports it. Unless Murkysoft bring out a version of
> Windows only supporting IPv6 I cannot see it's take up on LANs, MANs and
> WANs.
>
Even if it's not widely used, many people will need to know it, for the people
who do use it.
>
> As it is more complicated to understand and master than IPv4 and thus
> breaches the fundamental KISS principle the take up of IPv6 may be a hell of
> a long time coming.
>
> So I am keen to hear why anyone would want to use IPv6 locally.
>
Because it's there
Cheers
Ken
Rodney Pont
>Adrian Boliston wrote:
>
>>...
>> Do you know if my XyZel 642R will support IP6?
>>
>> What about operating system support for it?
>
>
>There appears to be windows, linux and mac support to
>
>various extents. I will try and get some more information.
AIX supports it, autoconf6 -v will detect the subnet and allocate a
valid IPv6 address, ifconfig -a will show the IPv4 and the IPv6 address
after it.
The latest OS/2 stack (4.3) does not support it but there is talk of
adding it.
IBM have an article on writing software to support both at
<http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/web/library/wa-ipv6.html?dwzone=w
eb>. Example code is in 'C' (doesn't seem to be C++ - but I'm a bit
rusty nowadays).
I remember reading about it in the early '90's, but I'm not paid to
keep up to date anymore and don't have the resources of a œ20m+ company
behind me to do so :-)
--
Regards - Rodney Pont
e-mail r(nothing)pont (at) btinternet (dot) com
fred
Rev Adrian Kennard wrote:
> Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
>
> I am working out how it would be practical to start offering
> IP6 service. As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space
> to our customers and route IP6 traffic. I am wondering about
> asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6 support on ADSL
> circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may be
> one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central
> I am ordering as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all
> we need is an ADSL router that understands it.
>
> I'd be interested in comments.
>
> As an ISP we are already unusual in not having fixed limits
> on IP4 assignments (you just have to follow RIPE rules). With
> IP6 we would be giving each customer a million million million
> million addresses as a minimum assignment...
1*10^24 address? Where would I put them?
A minimum assignment? I don't have that many computers.
With that many addresses imagine the potential for sharing your
bandwidth with your neighbours, and their neighbours, and their
neighbours... ;)
Seriously though, I've messed with IPv6 between home and univ (over a
VPN tunnel) and I'm not too sure I'd need it.
If I were an organisation then sure, I would need it.
But I think the admins of many smaller organisations would prefer to
hide behind a NAT firewall for their desktop machines, as would most
home users.
I think IPv6 is a good idea (I do telecoms research at my Uni) but its
introduction won't be led by home users but by ISPs [only offering IPv6]
and bigger organisations [who actually need it] - oh and M$ must support
it, naturally.
As long as people can still get what they want with IPv4 they have no
incentive to shell out for new IPv6 kit. If it's included in the next
Windows OS and all new routers (at no extra charge) then people will use it.
To answer your original question: I personally wouldn't use it - I don;t
need all of my home PCs uniquely addressable. I wouldn;t want them
uniquely addressable as I don;t run any services from them.
Fred.
PS I also like the pseudo-anonymity of a dynamic address.
Todd Richardson
cowboy with an arrow in his back.
Seriously though I cannot see many, if any private networks taking it up
soon, if ever. Why bother migrating (and it would be a big migration in some
networks) if there is no compelling technical or business need.
I used to work for a major network vendor and I recall a product manager
saying that IPv6 support will happen if ever enough clients request it,
"which may not be in our lifetime" (his words)
The future of IPv6 is with ISPs and carriers. Only if Cisco's revenues fall
so much that they need to create more revenue by persuading the brainwashed
CCNPs to upgrade their IOS code and use IPv6 will it ever take off.
I was unaware that Murkysoft supported IPv6 but then I have tried to avoid
dabbling in the finer points of their software since I got a life and
decided to keep my own hair.
"Rev Adrian Kennard"
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:3D39C39E.7070605@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
unds.co.uk...
Todd Richardson
all use NAT as it is the minimum acceptable security from the internet. IMHO
only ISPs, carriers and organisations with huge numbers of web and mail
servers in their DMZs would ever use it.
It is hard enough teaching most IT people how IPv4 works, IPv6 would blow
their minds and cause immediate "glazing".
"fred" <null@!void.com> wrote in message
news:ahcrk4$bnh$1...@venus.btinternet.com...
Rev Adrian Kennard
> That is fine as long as you remember that the definition of a pioneer is a
> cowboy with an arrow in his back.
Not one I have heard before.
> Seriously though I cannot see many, if any private networks taking it up
> soon, if ever. Why bother migrating (and it would be a big migration in some
> networks) if there is no compelling technical or business need.
That's the thing - if more applications start using some of the
features of IP6 then people will need to start using IP6 to get
the full benefit. From my reading so far it appears that IP6 could
have the QoS type features people would like for VoIP, for example.
> I used to work for a major network vendor and I recall a product manager
> saying that IPv6 support will happen if ever enough clients request it,
> "which may not be in our lifetime" (his words)
Things change faster than people expect...
> The future of IPv6 is with ISPs and carriers. Only if Cisco's revenues fall
> so much that they need to create more revenue by persuading the brainwashed
> CCNPs to upgrade their IOS code and use IPv6 will it ever take off.
Well, maybe.
> I was unaware that Murkysoft supported IPv6 but then I have tried to avoid
> dabbling in the finer points of their software since I got a life and
> decided to keep my own hair.
We can be pioneers in IP6 and still offer a perfectly good IP4 service...
Rev Adrian Kennard
> Most organisations, even those with 100,000+ nodes will not need it. They
> all use NAT as it is the minimum acceptable security from the internet. IMHO
> only ISPs, carriers and organisations with huge numbers of web and mail
> servers in their DMZs would ever use it.
You obviously don't know our customers very well <-:
No organisation should be using NAT "as a security measure".
If they are then they obviously do not quite understand what they
are doing. It is just as easy to mis-program a port mapping on
a NAT router as mis-program a hole in a firewall. NAT does mean
that you will reduce the risk of attack, but that is not what
it is for and a firewall is designed to reduce the risk of
attach and likely to have much better security and controls
to avoid mistakes.
> It is hard enough teaching most IT people how IPv4 works, IPv6 would blow
> their minds and cause immediate "glazing".
There is that I suppose. I'll let you know on my next IP course
as I'll be throwing in a bit of IP6 awareness at the end <-:
TaPouBelle
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote:
>Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
>
>I am working out how it would be practical to start offering
>IP6 service. As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space
>to our customers and route IP6 traffic. I am wondering about
>asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6 support on ADSL
>circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may be
>one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central
>I am ordering as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all
>we need is an ADSL router that understands it.
I would be interested in testing this out...I will double check if
there is an IPv6 image for my router...
Todd Richardson
"Rev Adrian Kennard"
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
unds.co.uk...
> Todd Richardson wrote:
> That's the thing - if more applications start using some of the
> features of IP6 then people will need to start using IP6 to get
> the full benefit. From my reading so far it appears that IP6 could
> have the QoS type features people would like for VoIP, for example.
QoS may as you say be the "killer app" that drives IPv6. I probably need to
read up on the latest thinking on IPv6 as I last researched it three or four
years ago.
>
>
> > I used to work for a major network vendor and I recall a product manager
> > saying that IPv6 support will happen if ever enough clients request it,
> > "which may not be in our lifetime" (his words)
>
>
> Things change faster than people expect...
>
Too true, the rapid adoption and development of wireless is an example.
> We can be pioneers in IP6 and still offer a perfectly good IP4 service...
>
I take it that you are investigating the offer of IPv6 as a "product
differentiator" to give you a market edge. In a business where demand is
outstripped by supply this makes sound business sense.
Michael Beddow
support behind IPv6. See
http://www.ipv6-taskforce.org/
They're convinced that the existing IPv4 address space allocations give the
US an unfair advantage, and the hidden agenda seems to be the notion that if
IPv6 expertise and deployment is fostered in the EU then all those smug
transatlantic types will have to buy in European know-how when they suddenly
want IPv6 their side of the pond. Just like they queued up to buy Concorde I
suppose.
After all there was big EU backing and funding behind D2-MAC, and I've just
overcome my techno-hoarder's instinct and flung my last D2-MAC receiver into
the skip.
But there might be some Euro-cash for subsidising IPv6 awareness courses,
for anyone who can stomach the awful paperwork involved in applying for such
funds.
Michael
----------------------------
Michael Beddow
The Anglo-Norman Dictionary http://anglo-norman.net/
Rev Adrian Kennard
>...
>>We can be pioneers in IP6 and still offer a perfectly good IP4 service...
>>
>>
> I take it that you are investigating the offer of IPv6 as a "product
> differentiator" to give you a market edge. In a business where demand is
> outstripped by supply this makes sound business sense.
The product differenciator is more general in that we want to be
seen, as we are, as innovative and forward thinking. IP6 is just
part of that. Some of my customers have already expressed an
interest in having IP6 from us, so I will start looking in to
the practical aspects of using it ourselves and offering it as
a service. Should be fun.
Todd Richardson
to teach them hex before I could get them to understand the make up of a MAC
address, seems they do not teach "bases" in schools anymore.
"Rev Adrian Kennard"
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:3D3A7E08.2030606@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
unds.co.uk...
Rev Adrian Kennard
> I did a basic networking course for IT support and developers, I found I had
> to teach them hex before I could get them to understand the make up of a MAC
> address, seems they do not teach "bases" in schools anymore.
Binary and hex is the first thing I cover on the IP course I run.
It's a one day course, but it intended to fill in the gaps
in peoples knowledge as they don't learn the basics these days
and then wonder why the subnet is the same on every PC but the
IP is different! <-:
Stan Dorrington
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
writes
>Todd Richardson wrote:
[snip]
>
>> It is hard enough teaching most IT people how IPv4 works, IPv6 would blow
>> their minds and cause immediate "glazing".
>
>There is that I suppose. I'll let you know on my next IP course
If you weren't doing so much, we might even get the course :-)
How on earth does window-replacement fit in here?
>as I'll be throwing in a bit of IP6 awareness at the end <-:
>
Great. "It is hard enough... so let's make it harder!"
--
Stan Dorrington
Peter Corlett
> Most organisations, even those with 100,000+ nodes will not need it. They
> all use NAT as it is the minimum acceptable security from the internet.
> IMHO only ISPs, carriers and organisations with huge numbers of web and
> mail servers in their DMZs would ever use it.
Depends on the organisation, surely?
I give public IP addresses to all my hosts, but it doesn't mean that there
isn't a packet-filtering host much like one would have with NAT. Having
public IP space for internal hosts makes authorised access from the outside
much easier.
Logging in to an internal host when there's NAT in the way involves logging
into the gateway and onwards to the inside. This tends to break
rsync-over-ssh and other useful schemes. Plus, the packet filter host
probably isn't fast enough to decrypt and re-encrypt the potential 768kb/s
of traffic so I'd be unnecessarily throttling myself.
Peter Corlett
> Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
Toy!
> I am working out how it would be practical to start offering IP6 service.
> As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space to our customers and route IP6
> traffic. I am wondering about asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6
> support on ADSL circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may
> be one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central I am ordering
> as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all we need is an ADSL router
> that understands it.
I have my doubts that many "proper" ADSL modems understand IPv6. You're
probably more likely to get it working on one of those nasty USB frogs that
BT provide :)
If you provide tunneling, will you only tunnel to the router address, or any
address assigned to the ADSL? My packet filter host is much more likely to
be able to terminate the tunnel than the router...
> As an ISP we are already unusual in not having fixed limits on IP4
> assignments (you just have to follow RIPE rules). With IP6 we would be
> giving each customer a million million million million addresses as a
> minimum assignment...
Put me down for a /48 :)
Adrian Kennard
Indeed... Once I have something in place I'll request an allocation
from RIPE. I need to ensure our DNS servers can cope, and our allocation
systems.
I can probably offer IP6 dialup though as I wrote the L2TP server
and RADIUS server so can relatively easily add the necessary handling.
Once we have a tunnel end point and some IP6 peering we will tunnel
to any address you want for now.
--
Rev Adrian Kennard
David Davies
www.6bone.net here we come
David
On Sat, 20 Jul 2002 17:15:25 +0100, Rev Adrian Kennard
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote:
Adrian Kennard
> I will give it a go.
> www.6bone.net here we come
Not necessarily 6bone.net...
Anyway, I have IP6 on my linux box here, and ping6,
traceroute6, ifconfig, route, all seem to work...
Looks like it won't be as hard as I thought.
--
Rev Adrian Kennard
Peter Corlett
> Peter Corlett wrote:
[...]
>> Put me down for a /48 :)
> Indeed... Once I have something in place I'll request an allocation from
> RIPE. I need to ensure our DNS servers can cope, and our allocation
> systems.
IPv6 routing isn't terribly scary to set up. Now working DNS - that's the
fun bit. It's all very good having hosts autoconfigure an address, but that
address has to get into forward and reverse DNS. Because the number space is
sparsely populated, you can't just do $GENERATE to fully-populate the
reverse (and forward) zones.
Then it gets into A6 and DNAME records and it all gets a bit hairy because
of the extra potential for visits from the fuckup fairy. Heck, it almost
*invites* a visit...
> I can probably offer IP6 dialup though as I wrote the L2TP server and
> RADIUS server so can relatively easily add the necessary handling.
I can't imagine that being terribly popular given your dialup service
appears to still only be 0845. I'm not even sure where the modem is, and
I've got a Freeserve Anytime account that's much better news for my phone
bill :)
Kwang Moon
"Rev Adrian Kennard"
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:3D398C9D.5030008@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
unds.co.uk...
>
> I am working out how it would be practical to start offering
> IP6 service. As an LIR we can allocate IP6 address space
> to our customers and route IP6 traffic. I am wondering about
> asking BT if they have plans for direct IP6 support on ADSL
> circuits or whether we would just tunnel over IP4. It may be
> one reason to get L2TP pass through on the new BT central
> I am ordering as that would allow us to do IP6, and then all
> we need is an ADSL router that understands it.
>
> I'd be interested in comments.
>
John Burton
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote in message
news:3D398C9D.5030008@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
unds.co.uk...
> Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
Is there a good place on-line to learn about IP6?
I understand what it is, but there is a whole lot of stuff about tunneling
over IP4 for example that I know nothing about and would be interested in
learning about.
Rev Adrian Kennard
I am still learning, but there seem to be plenty of web sites
around. I'll obviously be setting up some detailed web pages
explaining it all in due course.
Getting my linux box on IP6 and connected to the world appears
to have been quite simple. I am working on the necessary changes
to our systems to allow IP6 assignments, routes, etc, etc.
TaPouBelle
<Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
wrote:
>John Burton wrote:
>
>> "Rev Adrian Kennard"
>> <Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
>> wrote in message
>> news:3D398C9D.5030008@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
>> unds.co.uk...
>>
>>>Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
>>>
>>
>> Is there a good place on-line to learn about IP6?
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/732/Tech/ipv6/
Sertav
> John Burton wrote:
>
> > "Rev Adrian Kennard"
> > <Tha...@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpounds.co.uk>
> > wrote in message
> > news:3D398C9D.5030008@by-sending-this-email-i-agree-to-pay-a-kennard-50-ukpo
> > unds.co.uk...
> >
> >>Anyone interested in IP6 over broadband/ADSL?
> >>
Doesn't IPv6 have problems handling DNS?
Cheers
Sertav
Adrian Kennard
Eh? Not heard that one. Seems find from what I can see.
What problems were you thinking of?
--
Rev Adrian Kennard