Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*IPv6\+Linux\s+status\s+page\s+useful\?\s*$/: 20 ]

Total 20 documents matching your query.

1. IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:37:23 +0100
Hi all, a short lecture by me relating to the current status of IPv6 and Linux and short discussions afterwards on the 1. IPv6-Conference of the IPv6-Forum in Germany 1999 (Berlin 08.-09.12.1999) gav
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00041.html (8,201 bytes)

2. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:17:45 +0300 (MSK)
... What's it? Not a kernel issue. Some DHCPv6 implementations exist, but I did not hear about any attempts to compile it for linux. Not kernel issues. Actually, stateless addrconf also not a kernel
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00042.html (8,733 bytes)

3. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:44:59 -0800 (PST)
You can only prohibit using anycast addresses as source addresses only if you are semantically able to distinguish an anycast address from a unicast address. This may be possible with the reserved su
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00043.html (8,741 bytes)

4. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:05:35 -0800 (PST)
How about the ipv4-ipv6 socks translator at http://www.socks.nec.com/translator.html I presume by "renumbering hierarchically" you mean router renumbering? What about some of the v4-v6 transition sch
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00044.html (8,638 bytes)

5. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:03:16 +0900
You can see some information about IPv6 patched / enabled applications at <ftp://ftp2.v6.linux.or.jp/pub/Linux/IPv6-2/>. It contains 'beta' patches, but most of them should be ok. Also, The IPv6 App
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00045.html (9,154 bytes)

6. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:23:48 +0300 (MSK)
It is impossible even to say "someone uses an unicast as anycast." Think a bit, anycast != unicast only from receiver viewpoint. If receiver thinks that an address is anycast, it __ anycast. I am af
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00046.html (9,000 bytes)

7. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:00:45 -0800 (PST)
Hi Alexey, Note, I said unicast address as anycast address. Of course, the unicast mechanism is different from anycast. Also, there is no need for the receiver to be aware of the fact that it has an
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00047.html (9,817 bytes)

8. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:10:37 +0300 (MSK)
Nope. It's knowledge is the _only_ thing differing anycast of unicasts. They are indistingushable outside of receivers. I suspect we talk about different things. 8) I am. Please, send if you find it
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00050.html (8,775 bytes)

9. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:15:09 +0100
My understanding is: "Classical" anycast addresses are indistuingishable from normal addresses for both senders and receivers, the trick is the routing. Different senders may reach different receiver
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00051.html (9,867 bytes)

10. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:51:21 -0800 (PST)
This is the optimal case - however, I don't recollect reading any rfc that says that this is guaranteed in a ip network. In practice, this should not happen unless something's broken. I would expect
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00052.html (9,232 bytes)

11. IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Peter Bieringer <pb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 11:37:23 +0100
Hi all, a short lecture by me relating to the current status of IPv6 and Linux and short discussions afterwards on the 1. IPv6-Conference of the IPv6-Forum in Germany 1999 (Berlin 08.-09.12.1999) gav
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00133.html (8,216 bytes)

12. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 18:17:45 +0300 (MSK)
Hello! ... What's it? Not a kernel issue. Some DHCPv6 implementations exist, but I did not hear about any attempts to compile it for linux. Not kernel issues. Actually, stateless addrconf also not a
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00134.html (8,773 bytes)

13. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Cacophonix Gaul <cacophonix@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 12:44:59 -0800 (PST)
You can only prohibit using anycast addresses as source addresses only if you are semantically able to distinguish an anycast address from a unicast address. This may be possible with the reserved su
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00135.html (8,756 bytes)

14. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Cacophonix Gaul <cacophonix@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Dec 1999 13:05:35 -0800 (PST)
How about the ipv4-ipv6 socks translator at http://www.socks.nec.com/translator.html I presume by "renumbering hierarchically" you mean router renumbering? What about some of the v4-v6 transition sch
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00136.html (8,683 bytes)

15. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 10:03:16 +0900
Hi, You can see some information about IPv6 patched / enabled applications at <ftp://ftp2.v6.linux.or.jp/pub/Linux/IPv6-2/>. It contains 'beta' patches, but most of them should be ok. Also, The IPv6
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00137.html (9,294 bytes)

16. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 18:23:48 +0300 (MSK)
Hello! It is impossible even to say "someone uses an unicast as anycast." Think a bit, anycast != unicast only from receiver viewpoint. If receiver thinks that an address is anycast, it __ anycast. I
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00138.html (9,034 bytes)

17. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Cacophonix Gaul <cacophonix@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 14:00:45 -0800 (PST)
Hi Alexey, Note, I said unicast address as anycast address. Of course, the unicast mechanism is different from anycast. Also, there is no need for the receiver to be aware of the fact that it has an
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00139.html (9,832 bytes)

18. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 19:10:37 +0300 (MSK)
Hello! Nope. It's knowledge is the _only_ thing differing anycast of unicasts. They are indistingushable outside of receivers. I suspect we talk about different things. 8) I am. Please, send if you f
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00142.html (8,809 bytes)

19. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: <venaas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 22:15:09 +0100
My understanding is: "Classical" anycast addresses are indistuingishable from normal addresses for both senders and receivers, the trick is the routing. Different senders may reach different receiver
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00143.html (10,001 bytes)

20. Re: IPv6+Linux status page useful? (score: 1)
Author: Cacophonix Gaul <cacophonix@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 14:51:21 -0800 (PST)
This is the optimal case - however, I don't recollect reading any rfc that says that this is guaranteed in a ip network. In practice, this should not happen unless something's broken. I would expect
/archives/netdev/1999-12/msg00144.html (9,247 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu