On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 12:56 -0600, Quantum Scientific wrote:
>On Tuesday 01 March 2005 9:08, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 07:44 -0600, Quantum Scientific wrote:
>> >On Tuesday 01 March 2005 4:10, Gilles Quillard wrote:
>> >> This works but this needs that the kernel has been compiled with IPv6,
>> >> which is not mandotary. A lot of people in the Linux community do not
>> >> have experience with IPv6 yet and are not ready to use it. So making it
>> >> mandatory for NFS, even in a pure IPv4 network, is not easy.
>> >
>> >My experience is that IPV6 is extremely difficult to figure out how to set
>up
>> >securely, for the time being, due to lack of connection-sharing.
>>
>> NAT is not a firewall. Get that into your brain.
>
>Jeroen, was this addressed to me, or to Giles? Never mind, it doesn't matter;
> your
>words show that you are an uneducated man.
As you have read correctly, and how the indentation of the message shows
it was a reply to your post. Btw, I am 'educated' enough ;)
>On Tuesday 01 March 2005 9:08, Jeroen Massar wrote:
>> First couple of hits when doing a google on "Teredo BSD", or for you to
>> click as that might be difficult:
>> http://www.google.com/search?q=teredo+bsd
>...
>> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 07:44 -0600, Quantum Scientific wrote:
>> >Although I realize that all of us who run Linux are ostensibly uber-gurus,
>> >fact is this is a negative first experience for most, stemming from
>> >attempts by distros to encourage ppl to use it with an inoperative
>> >function, and without an obvious way to troubleshoot/repair.
>>
>> I can clearly assume that you are not part of the 'ostensibly
>> uber-gurus' you try to mention.
>
>And we can clearly assume that you are petty, and just an asshole.
Pretty depends on who you ask of course, most ladies will say so
fortunately and I don't care about a guys opinion ;)
> No, I am
>not a Linux uber-guru. I am a commercial real estate developer, using Linux
>as a hobby. You may not want my input, but others seem to, judging from
>emails I've gotten in back-channel about you.
Could you please publish these 'back-channel' communications?
I would love to hear comments about me. They are apparently about me,
and reading from your sentence you are implying that they are accusing
me of a lot of bad things. I don't need names, but please publish them,
then everybody knows what it is so bad about me, and even better, then I
might learn from these 'issues' that so 'others' might be having.
But I'll just assume you've misjudged me. The fact that you need faul
words tells a lot about your reasoning.
>> Loads of people seem to have no problem at all with IPv6, getting it up
>> and running and actually using it for a lot of traffic.
>> That fact that you are only complaining, without doing any actual
>> research, typing two words in google, says enough. You are not even
>> capable of configuring your mailer properly to include your own name,
>> the field is not called "Realname" for nothing...
>
>Obviously you have not been following my emails, and have simply written your
>response to carp and ignorantly pretend you are superior in some way. This
>is no different than noise.
Where is your actual technical arguments then? The only few items you
named are wellknown and are being addressed already, but things like
that take time, especially in an environment where people are doing it
on a free basis.
As for the 'superiority', let your 'back-channel' decide on that.
>As most here have ascertained, I said the things I have said, as reflective of
>the experiences of the majority when trying to set up IPV6.
"most" of the participants of these mailinglists, both of them to which
you where at first unable to subscribe, contain people who simply lurk
and listen and try to learn from the content that is brought forth here.
Claiming 'most' is simply silly.
>If you have a
>problem with that, you are unable to understand the true issues, and show it
>with every word.
The problems are known, but you are trying to misleadingly shove them
under the wrong header. Check http://www.v6fix.net as others have also
pointed out to you. You might have also wanted to read my mails in where
I noted that even Cisco PIX's don't support it yet, unless you get an
EFT or the brand sprankling new 7.0 image.
>You will have no more responses from me.
Thank you very much, that saves me quite some valuable time trying to
reply to posts which are misleading in various ways.
Greets,
Jeroen
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
|