| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | IP v6 |
BS> Yeah.. but not that I like this situation but I really think BS> something serious must happen before the ISPs are being forced to BS> use IPv6 on wide-spread basis. KW> I'm waiting for home routers to build in IPV6/IPV4 gateways - the KW> network can go IPV6, people will still have a NAT-ed private class KW> C address on the inside. It doesn't get the user any of the perks KW> of a full IPV6 network, (like getting rid of NAT) that's not a perk... that's a business plan... they do not want you to have NAT in the first place... they want to charge for each device connected to the network and then rate plan them... KW> but it's cheap and easy to implement. I can imagine the ISPs KW> pushing something like this instead of opening up the network. i don't see that happening... i see IPv6 taking a bit longer to be implemented but it is coming... they want more $$$ and IPv6 will give that to them if they are allowed to bill for each device connected... most folks aren't aware of how much they are being ripped off every day in so many ways... )\/(ark ---* Origin: (1:3634/12.42) SEEN-BY: 3/0 633/267 640/954 712/0 620 848 @PATH: 3634/12 123/500 261/38 712/848 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.