From RLFink@lbl.gov Mon Jun 10 15:07:22 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 -0700 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: Jim Bound and a few others of us think that a 6bone BOF in Montreal might be a useful activity. A possible agenda for such is shown below, tho it can certainly be bashed like any other :-) Jim also opined that an evening BOF might be best. So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...? Thanks, Bob Fink Lawrence Berkeley Lab =============== 6bone BOF session for Montreal IETF: * strawmen proposals DNS flagging with v4 compatible v6 address tunnel proposal (including overview of options) v6 address assignment registry (interim) other * 6bone regional coordinators European Pacific Rim US/Canada * participant plans ESnet UNI-C other - From jun@wide.ad.jp Wed Jun 12 10:17:17 1996 From: jun@wide.ad.jp (Jun Murai) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:17:17 +0900 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: <199606120940.SAA05350@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> folks, we just have started the physical version of 6bone/japan between tokyo and nara. as well as the funding goes, i and/or somebody from my group would like to report on the status update of them from jp/asia when the bof is on. jun At 07:07 96/06/10 -0700, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > Jim Bound and a few others of us think that a 6bone BOF in Montreal might > be a useful activity. A possible agenda for such is shown below, tho it > can certainly be bashed like any other :-) > > > Jim also opined that an evening BOF might be best. > > So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and > location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...? From jun@wide.ad.jp Wed Jun 12 10:19:20 1996 From: jun@wide.ad.jp (Jun Murai) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:19:20 +0900 Subject: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan Message-ID: <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> folks, originally, we have been planning to work on this on 6:66am of June 6. but delayed. sorry. note that we have constructed a physical testbed rather than a logical one, to avoid possible confusion on the existing testbed of WIDE. Our plan is to extend this with some more physical means, and also with logical means as well. we also plan to use our T1 cable to MCI california pop if somebody out there would like to work together. here is a short report from Kazu Yamamoto (kazu@wide.ad.jp).. jun --- At 15:22 on Jun 9th, 1996, the first IPv6 packet traveled on the WIDE 6bone whose topology at that time is as follows: 133.4.6.34 133.4.21.33 ntwo0 Serial(64k) ntwo1 Serial(64k) Univ Tokyo ----------------- Iwanami --------------- Nara(zeta) | ne0 ntwo1 | ne0 ntwo0 | we0 | 133.4.6.33 | 133.4.21.34 | ----+----- Ether ----+---- Ether ----+---- Ether 133.4.6.66 133.4.49.30 133.4.23.16 Every node is equipped with WIDE/Nara v6 kernel on BSD/OS 2.1 and has IPv4-compatible IPv6 address. The two 64k serial lines are saved from WIDE v4 backbone with Paradyne, a multiplex CSU and supported by RISCOM/N2, a high speed serial interface on PC AT, attached to Cisco HDLC. This means that WIDE 6bone is not virtual (like Mbone) but physical. The following is ping results from Nara to Tokyo. zeta# ./ping6 ::133.4.6.34 trying to get source for ::133.4.6.34 source should be ::8504:1522 PING ::133.4.6.34 (::8504:622): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=0 ttl=254 time=85.173 ms 64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=1 ttl=254 time=85.071 ms 64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=2 ttl=254 time=85.145 ms 64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=3 ttl=254 time=85.086 ms 64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=4 ttl=254 time=85.152 ms We are planning to interconnect to Keio univ, Osaka univ, Hitachi ltd, and NTT in the near future. From bound@zk3.dec.com Wed Jun 12 12:09:40 1996 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (bound@zk3.dec.com) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 07:09:40 -0400 Subject: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Jun 96 18:19:20 +0900." <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> Message-ID: <9606121109.AA17601@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> Jun, This is truly WONDERFUL and EXCELLENT! Congratulations, /jim From deering@parc.xerox.com Wed Jun 12 14:37:15 1996 From: deering@parc.xerox.com (Steve Deering) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:37:15 PDT Subject: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan In-Reply-To: jun's message of Wed, 12 Jun 96 02:19:20 -0800. <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> Message-ID: <96Jun12.063728pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com> > At 15:22 on Jun 9th, 1996, the first IPv6 packet traveled on the WIDE > 6bone... Congratulations! > Every node is equipped with WIDE/Nara v6 kernel on BSD/OS 2.1 and has > IPv4-compatible IPv6 address. Why are you not using native IPv6 addresses from the address space allocated for IPv6 testing, rather than IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses? As far as I understand, that only time you should need to use IPv4-compat. addresses is for IPv6 hosts that do not have a neighboring IPv6 router. Steve From deering@parc.xerox.com Wed Jun 12 14:54:18 1996 From: deering@parc.xerox.com (Steve Deering) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:54:18 PDT Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: RLFink's message of Mon, 10 Jun 96 07:07:22 -0800. Message-ID: <96Jun12.065430pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com> Bob, > So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and > location, For an official BOF (i.e., one listed on the IETF agenda and assigned a room by the Secretariat), you need pre-approval from an IESG member, e.g., one of our Area Directors. Also, I suspect that it might be too late to get a BOF scheduled -- the agenda for Montreal is already packed full. Still, it's worth a try. > e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you,... Monday is out -- there's an ipngwg meeting that evening. I assume that Tuesday evening is the IETF social, since there are no meetings scheduled for that night, but I haven't yet seen any info on the social. Personally, I usually skip the social, so Tuesday would be OK with me. Also, Thursday after the Open IESG meeting would be fine with me, especially if we held the BOF over dinner somewhere. For the agenda, we need to discuss the status of router implementations, e.g., do we have a routing protocol implemented yet for the 6bone, or will we have to use static routes initially. Also, under "participant plans" I'd be happy to report on our project to get IPv6 into Dartnet, which has just begun. Steve From bound@zk3.dec.com Wed Jun 12 15:14:25 1996 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (bound@zk3.dec.com) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 10:14:25 -0400 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Jun 96 06:54:18 PDT." <96Jun12.065430pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com> Message-ID: <9606121414.AA00334@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> All I always skip the social so that night is good for me. /jim From crawdad@fnal.gov Wed Jun 12 21:42:47 1996 From: crawdad@fnal.gov (Matt Crawford) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:42:47 -0500 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: "10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 PDT." <"v03007302ade1db0ff52b"@[131.243.112.98]> Message-ID: <199606122042.PAA01776@munin.fnal.gov> So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...? Well, I usually go to the social, but (a) there hasn't been a peep about one and (b) I seem to be outnumbered on that point, so Tuesday or late Thursday seem prime. Matt From hinden@ipsilon.com Wed Jun 12 23:31:47 1996 From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden) Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:31:47 -0700 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: Tuesday is fine for me. Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Jun 13 15:15:59 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:15:59 -0700 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: <199606122042.PAA01776@munin.fnal.gov> References: "10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 PDT." <"v03007302ade1db0ff52b"@[131.243.112.98]> Message-ID: Gentle folks, Given that I am not able to get the IETF secretariat to assign any BOF space (they say there is no more!), I think we are left with being an informal meeting for this IETF. The principal suggestion has been an evening meeting, Tuesday or Thursday, possibly over dinner. May I make another suggestion. I don't think we need a particularly long meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to 1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room. This way everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk show up for the 1300 meeting. Then if we agree we need more discussion time, we can agree to an evening meeting, say that evening (Tues) if there really is no social, or on Thursday after the plenary. Bob From deering@parc.xerox.com Thu Jun 13 15:52:56 1996 From: deering@parc.xerox.com (Steve Deering) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:52:56 PDT Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: RLFink's message of Thu, 13 Jun 96 07:15:59 -0800. Message-ID: <96Jun13.075305pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com> Bob, > May I make another suggestion. I don't think we need a particularly long > meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to > 1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room. That would be fine with me. Will you provide sandwiches? :-) Steve From bound@zk3.dec.com Thu Jun 13 15:51:24 1996 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (bound@zk3.dec.com) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 96 10:51:24 -0400 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Jun 96 07:15:59 PDT." Message-ID: <9606131451.AA20849@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> Bob, This works for me. Tues Lunch first. thanks /jim From hinden@ipsilon.com Thu Jun 13 17:43:00 1996 From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:43:00 -0700 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: Bob, >May I make another suggestion. I don't think we need a particularly long >meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to >1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room. This way >everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk >show up for the 1300 meeting. > Fine by me too. If we could figure how to get some lunch brought in it would be great! Bob From jun@wide.ad.jp Thu Jun 13 17:33:32 1996 From: jun@wide.ad.jp (Jun Murai) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:33:32 +0900 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: <199606131657.BAA09126@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> i vote for thursday. i alreday have an appointment on tuesday. but if the mojority is on tuesday, then let me try to move the existing appointment away. jun At 09:43 96/06/13 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote: > Bob, > > >May I make another suggestion. I don't think we need a particularly long > >meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to > >1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room. This way > >everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk > >show up for the 1300 meeting. > > > > Fine by me too. If we could figure how to get some lunch brought in it > would be great! > > Bob > > > > From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Jun 13 18:49:32 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:49:32 -0700 Subject: 6bone meeting Tuesday 1130 to 1300 after the IPng meeting Message-ID: Enough folk can make a 6bone meeting Tuesday from 1130 to 1300 after the IPng meeting, in the same room, that I think we should do it. If folk will let me know they are coming to the meeting so I can get a head count, I'll see if there is a possibility of getting some lunch delivered. I'll reconstitute an agenda from what I've seen on the mailer, and send it to the list in a few days. Thanks, Bob From Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr Fri Jun 14 09:49:35 1996 From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr (Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:49:35 +0200 Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal Message-ID: <199606140849.KAA15597@phoebe.urec.fr> | From majordom@ISI.EDU Thu Jun 13 19:04 MET 1996 | | >May I make another suggestion. I don't think we need a particularly long | >meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to | >1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room. This way | >everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk | >show up for the 1300 meeting. | > | ====BT: fine with me too. +Bernard Tuy. From RLFink@lbl.gov Sat Jun 22 19:58:02 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:02 -0700 Subject: 6bone logo contest delayed Message-ID: I must beg forbearance from Patrick Bernier and Michael Clay, who both submitted nice 6bone logos, but I have been too busy to get to the contest conclusion in time for the Montreal IETF. Also, I would prefer to have a few more logos, and more importantly, be able to use this to get a little more attention for the 6bone project. So, at the moment, I would propose delaying this till the December IETF meeting (San Jose I think). Maybe we will be a little further along with the 6bone and can advertize by having our own logo'd t-shirt available! Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Sat Jun 22 19:57:49 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:49 -0700 Subject: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300 Message-ID: 6bone folk, Here is yet another draft agenda for the meeting in Montreal on Tuesday, 1130 till 1300, right after the IPng meeting, in the same room. Please wait to bash it till the meeting. I will be trying to get some sodas and sandwiches for the meeting. Thanks, Bob =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D 6bone agenda * issues for discussion what routing to use routing registry how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addressing v6 address assignment tunnelling v6 testbed interconnection and regional process startup other * participant reports and plans ESnet Dartnet G6 Japan 6bone RIPE UNI-C other * 6bone regional coordination European Pacific Rim US/Canada - From hinden@ipsilon.com Sat Jun 22 22:27:22 1996 From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:27:22 -0700 Subject: 6bone logo contest delayed Message-ID: Bob, T-Shirts are a great idea! Bob From jun@wide.ad.jp Fri Jun 21 05:56:39 1996 From: jun@wide.ad.jp (Jun Murai) Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 13:56:39 +0900 Subject: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300 Message-ID: <199606222135.GAA07110@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> bob, are we going to have a projector in the room, for VGA? jun At 11:57 96/06/22 -0700, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > 6bone folk, > > Here is yet another draft agenda for the meeting in Montreal on Tuesday, > 1130 till 1300, right after the IPng meeting, in the same room. > From RLFink@lbl.gov Sat Jun 22 23:10:46 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:46 -0700 Subject: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300 In-Reply-To: <199606222135.GAA07110@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> Message-ID: Jun, >are we going to have a projector in the room, for VGA? I doubt it as I'm not an official meeting and I don't believe that they do this normally for regular meetings. I can ask, but be prepared to not have on available (i.e., assume vu-grafs only). Bob From Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr Tue Jun 25 19:52:13 1996 From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr (Bernard TUY) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:52:13 +0200 Subject: G6 Message-ID: <199606251852.UAA02403@calypso.urec.fr> As the BOF meetingheld at noon, and may be many of you either can't attend or weren't aware of it, I don't want to let you wait further more this info you asked me a while ago ... The G6 is a french group "playing" with many things related to IPv6. To know more precisely what is running, planned ... please have a look at http://www.urec.fr/IPv6/G6-english.html And if you're able to read French, you even can go to http://www.urec.fr/IPv6 Have fun with this -and of course all questions, comments ... are wellcome to g6@imag.fr ! Cheers, +bernard Tuy. From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Jun 26 22:29:33 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:33 -0700 Subject: 6BONE meeting report - 25 Jun 96 - Montreal Message-ID: 6BONE Meeting Report 26 June 1996 Montreal, Canada IETF The agenda was: 1. Opening remarks & agenda bashing a. background of 6bone to date b. 6bone purpose c. web site: www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone 2. Technical discussion issues a. what routing to use b. routing registry c. how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addresses d. v6 address assignment e. tunnelling f. v6 testbed interconnect/regional process startup 3. Particpant Reports/Plans a. ESnet b. Dartnet c. G6 d. Japan e. RIPE f. UNI-C 4. 6bone Regional Coordinators a. Europe b. Pacific Rim c. US/Canada =3D=3D=3D 1. Opening remarks and agenda bashing An unofficial IETF BOF was convened with Bob Fink as chair. He noted that it had been too late to get an official BOF slot due to IETF plenary requirements to keep the number of parallel tracks to 7 or less. Thus the meeting was held unofficially during the lunch hour (thanks to the IETF organizers) following the IPng session that morning. Jim Bound asked if it was appropriate that we try to become involved with the IETF "official" process as he wanted to see the 6bone effort free to operate without unecessary rules and procedures. This was left as an open issue. a. background of 6bone to date The background of the 6bone "startup" meeting at the LA IETF was stated, and those interested are referred to the 6bone web site. b. 6bone purpose The chair displayed the purpose statement and Steve Deering asked that the sentence on tunnel endpoints typically being workstation-class machnines be removed. There was consensus to do so. c. web site: www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone This web site includes the purpose statement, the notes of the LA IETF "startup" meeting and instructions on joining the mailer. 2. Technical discussion issues a. what routing to use Steve Deering started the discussion by noting the need to start small and grow as needed. Static routes at the start seemed best. There was consensus on this, with the caveat that there be freedom/ability to change as the 6bone grows. Comments made by various folk supported this position. It was noted that it wasn't necessary to specify routing for within "islands of v6", rather how they interconnected. b. routing registry Becca Nitzan (ESnet) echoed the need for simplicity as well as a mandatory routing registry from the start. She suggested at least contact, tunnel info and prefix be required from all participants. Gert Jan de Groot offerred the RIPE NCC routing registry service to start with. There was consensus to accept this offer. Bill Manning noted that the RA db software could also handle this registry. During this discussion there were several pointed comments about the need to a concrete plan for the 6bone, and to move quickly. This led to the items e. and f. below. Also during this discusson, Dmitri Haskins asked how he might become involved by offerring Bay routers as backbone routers for the 6bone. It was felt that these offers should be made through the mailer (or directly to appropriate groups) so that conversations could proceed appropriately in either an open forum (thus for all to see) or in a private fashion when specific agreements were being made. It was felt that this would be fairest to all router vendors and would serve to keep the process open and above board. c. how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addresses Steve Deering renewed his suggestion of the prior evening's IPng meeting that the convention of use for v4 compatible v6 addresses be that they are reserved for use when there is no adjacent v6 routing. In this sense these addresses then act as a flag that the host is not v6 reachable. Though there was much agreement on this point, there was controversy, and in the interest of time it was agreed to continue the discussion of this convention on the 6bone mailer. d. v6 address assignment There was consensus that RFC 1897 should be used for the assignment of native IPv6 addresses for the 6bone. As this format uses the IPv4 AS (Autonomous System) number as part of its prefix, these addresses may be self assigned. This choice also avoids falling own the "rat hole" of politics over provider-based v6 address assignment. e. tunnelling it was generally felt that to move the 6bone forward, an immediate effort be made to get existing v6 "islands" interconnected with tunnels. To identify the possible "tunnellees", the meeting briefly moved to item 3 on the agenda to understand possible participant status. f. v6 testbed interconnect/regional process startup After identifying the particpants able to immediately tunnel, it was agreed that there be a lunchtime meeting (immediately after the Wed. morning IPng meeting) to discuss the details. 3. Particpant Reports/Plans a. ESnet b. Dartnet c. G6 d. Japan e. RIPE f. UNI-C These reports were kept so brief as to be impossible to report here. It was clear that of the six above efforts, that the European and Japanes efforts were already running "islands" of IPv6 and could participate immediately in 6bone tunnelling agreements. The chair noted that the UNI-C (Danish university) folk, using the Danish Telebit routers, seemed to be the first to provide native v6 packet transport for a production network. Kudos to UNI-C! ESnet and Dartnet have plans to be "6bone" ready later this summer. The chair encouraged all the participants to post their reports and web pointers on the 6bone mailer. 4. 6bone Regional Coordinators a. Europe b. Pacific Rim c. US/Canada There was no time for discussion of this item. - end From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Jun 26 23:10:30 1996 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:30 -0700 Subject: 6BONE first tunnel startup meeting report - 26 Jun 96 - Montreal Message-ID: As agreed at the 6bone unofficial BOF meeting yesterday, those interested in immediate 6bone tunnel startup met after the Wed. morning IPng meeting to discuss the procedure and details. It was agreed that the WIDE/Japan, G6/France and UNI-C/Denmark IPv6 projects were ready to establish the very first 6bone tunnels. A startup date of 15 July 1996 was agreed upon. It was agreed that this process would start by the responsible person from each project sending email to the 6bone mailer with their request to establish manually configured tunnels with the other two. Geert Jan de Groot (of the RIPE NCC) agreed to act as coordinator for this effort. It was felt that working out details on the mail list would work best. As agreed at the previous day's 6bone meeting, the RIPE-NCC will act as the 6bone Routing Registry. Also, as agreed at the previous day's 6bone meeting, the IPv6 Testing Address Allocation format of RFC 1897 will be used. Regards, Bob Fink