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

Re: IPv6

Well, if everyone else feels that it would be a good reason and it won't bother any services, then I will add it to the agenda for the meeting this week and we can vote on it. 

-Mike

On Mar 28, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Jon Welters wrote:
If it's free, and we can impliment it without affecting services I can't 
see a reason not to do it.

Jon

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 11:34 -0400, Jon Klimowicz wrote:

On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 01:19:29AM -0400, Michael Moran wrote:
Well, I disagree with that point. I don't see any practical reason 
for the LUG to bother with it.
It gives LUG members a known IPv6 capable host to test their connection 
with. Can you name a reason not to add IPv6 to it?

--
Jon
"I'm an engineer not a normal person." -Dilbert
I'd have to agree with Jon. I don't see any practical reason to do a lot 
of things but that doesn't mean they don't
get done.

--
Brian McPherson (Dark-Fx)
"There's no place like ::1."
I see no reason not to get an IPv6 address for the LUG. It would be nice to have a known host that I could test with and know that there are IPv6 
services running on.

-jon (physcofish)