Re: ouch..

[Leigh Porter <leigh.porter () ukbroadband com>]

I'm looking forward to the awful experience of NAT444 promoting IPv6.


-- 
Leigh Porter


On 15 Sep 2011, at 00:37, "Mark Gauvin" <MGauvin () dryden ca> wrote:

> Nat444 or frontal labotomy hmm let's see at least with the second I  
> would still be able to make a living as a micro soft network admin;)
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2011-09-14, at 6:07 PM, "James Jones" <james () freedomnet co nz> wrote:
>
> > On 9/14/11 2:46 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > > In a message written on Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 09:24:25AM +1200, Don  
> > > Gould wrote:
> > > > How many of you have sat and thought about the merit of this web  
> > > > site?
> > > Ok, I'll take a swing at your list...
> > >
> > > > * Does Juniper break promises?
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > > * Does Cisco break them?
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > > * What bad things and experiences have you had with Cisco, Juniper?
> > > It might take me several days, and many pages to compile that list.
> > >
> > > > * What is the best technology for each company?
> > > Cisco: The AGS+ was ahead of its time.
> > > Jiniper: The Olive is quite nifty.
> > >
> > > > * Did you know that Cisco has a 100Gb solution?
> > > Yes, but I can't afford it.
> > >
> > > Now, with that out of the way, how much does everyone else hate  
> > > even the
> > > thought of NAT444?
> > >
> > > :) :) :)
> >
> > Just the thought of NAT444 makes my stomach turn.
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
> ______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________