Just a sample of the Echomail archive
Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.
|    IREX    |    Internet Rex (FTN <=> Internet) Public S    |    1,458 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 116 of 1,458    |
|    Simon Phillips to Michiel van der Vlist    |
|    re [2]: W7 + REX v2.29    |
|    07 Nov 10 13:21:02    |
      Hello Michiel,              I think the main problem with these pro-IPv6 arguments is that a lot       of them assume that every system should have a globally addressable IP       address. This is not the case. Most Internet users only use a       restricted set of apps anyway, like their Facebook, Twitter, and a few       other websites, and maybe a Torrent or a VPN client, which can run       from inside a NAT firewall.              Check out:              http://www.grc.com/nat/nat.htm              (just as an example)               MVDV> Reclaiming unused addresses will be a time consuming process with lots        MVDV> of legal proceduers giving us only a few month extra:              It's given Bigpond a lot longer than that. They've been using       reclaimed addresses since about a decade ago now :)              (Bigpond are a major Australian internet provider, one of the most       popular... but there are other examples, including various big US       internet providers that needed a lot more IP's for cable modems, etc.)               MVDV> To run an OPv4 only server, you will need a public IPv4 address, An        MVDV> RFC1918 address won't do as that is not globally routable.              Actually you don't. You just encapsulate the IPv4 traffic inside an       IPv6 based tunnel, which uses the IPv6 internet address to transfer       the IPv4 traffic. IPv6 specifically provides for this type of       technology, but you could always use IPSEC tunnels too, like modern       VPN clients use....               MVDV> The Linux version has a problem woth the DNS resolver. The the only way        MVDV> is to enter the raw IP address of the destination instead of the        MVDV> symbolic host name...              Okay, as it turns out, I have entered my remote system addresses as       IP's anyway not names. This problem would affect non-daemon mode too.        Thanks for the tip but I think I will have to keep looking.                     Regards,              Simon.              --- Ezycom V2.15g2 01FA0281        * Origin: ZZap BBS, Melbourne Vic AU - telnet://bbs.zzap.org (3:690/682.303)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca