From jcday@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk Sun Feb 2 18:26:09 1997 From: jcday@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk (Jonathan Day) Date: Sun, 2 Feb 1997 18:26:09 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Historic 6bone info Message-ID: <199702021826.SAA14953@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk> Hi Does anyone have historic maps or registry info for the 6bone? I'm trying to map out how it's changed since it started. Jonathan From RLFink@lbl.gov Mon Feb 3 15:49:47 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 07:49:47 -0800 Subject: Historic 6bone info In-Reply-To: <199702021826.SAA14953@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk> Message-ID: At 10:26 AM -0800 2/2/97, Jonathan Day wrote: ... >Does anyone have historic maps or registry info for the 6bone? I'm trying >to map out how it's changed since it started. I never saved them when I generated new ones as it was a pain for me to do so. Sorry, Bob From dhaskin@baynetworks.com Mon Feb 3 17:00:51 1997 From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 12:00:51 -0500 Subject: 6bone connectivity Message-ID: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Falks, We're currently experience a very pure 6bone connectivity. I think that the current situation is quite detrimental to 6bone effort. IMO, the main problem is that some/all core routers still use static routing to route between themselves. This leads to routing loops as well as to blackholing traffic to disabled routers even if an alternative path is available. To improve 6bone routing I propose to adopt the following policies: - restrict the backbone sites to only those routers that support RIPng; - make the backbone routers to use exclusively RIPng to route between themselves; - the backbone routers can use static routes only to route to their leaf clients; - the backbone routers should not advertise default prefixes (e.g. ::0/0 5f00::/16) between themselves. It is ok to advertise default prefixes to leaf clients; - each backbone router should maintain a RIPng tunnel with two or more other backbone routers. I think these, I hope, not too restrictive rules will improve overall 6bone connectivity as well as make lives router administrators easier. Dimitry From Alain.Durand@imag.fr Mon Feb 3 18:27:27 1997 From: Alain.Durand@imag.fr (Alain Durand) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 19:27:27 +0100 Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) "6bone connectivity" (Feb 3, 12:00pm) References: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: <970203192727.ZM16242@rama.imag.fr> On Feb 3, 12:00pm, Dimitry Haskin wrote: > Subject: 6bone connectivity > - each backbone router should maintain a RIPng tunnel with > two or more other backbone routers. I agree with dimitri's description of core routers. I would like to add that we should have a map of the backbone tunnels. Right now, i'm getting many many routes from wide/jp, which is obviously not the shortest path for G6. So I suspect some parts of the 6-bone are either isolated from the others or depending on one particular tunnel. Bob, could you draw those core tunnels on your map? Somehow, this should help us decide where transatlantic/transpacific tunnels are. - Alain. From RLFink@lbl.gov Mon Feb 3 18:54:53 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 10:54:53 -0800 Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: I agree with Dimitry's suggestion. Let's try it on for size and see how it works! Bob ============================================== At 9:00 AM -0800 2/3/97, Dimitry Haskin wrote: >Falks, > >We're currently experience a very pure 6bone connectivity. >I think that the current situation is quite detrimental >to 6bone effort. IMO, the main problem is that some/all core >routers still use static routing to route between themselves. >This leads to routing loops as well as to blackholing traffic to >disabled routers even if an alternative path is available. > >To improve 6bone routing I propose to adopt the following >policies: > >- restrict the backbone sites to only those routers that > support RIPng; > >- make the backbone routers to use exclusively RIPng to > route between themselves; > >- the backbone routers can use static routes only to route > to their leaf clients; > >- the backbone routers should not advertise default prefixes > (e.g. ::0/0 5f00::/16) between themselves. It is ok > to advertise default prefixes to leaf clients; > >- each backbone router should maintain a RIPng tunnel with > two or more other backbone routers. > >I think these, I hope, not too restrictive rules will improve >overall 6bone connectivity as well as make lives router >administrators easier. > >Dimitry From RLFink@lbl.gov Mon Feb 3 18:56:38 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 10:56:38 -0800 Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: <970203192727.ZM16242@rama.imag.fr> References: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) "6bone connectivity" (Feb 3, 12:00pm) <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: At 10:27 AM -0800 2/3/97, Alain Durand wrote: ... >I agree with dimitri's description of core routers. >I would like to add that we should have a map of the backbone tunnels. >Right now, i'm getting many many routes from wide/jp, which is >obviously not the shortest path for G6. So I suspect some parts >of the 6-bone are either isolated from the others or depending >on one particular tunnel. ... >Bob, could you draw those core tunnels on your map? >Somehow, this should help us decide where transatlantic/transpacific >tunnels are. I'll try to draw up something tomorrow that you can retrieve from the main map. Bob From deering@cisco.com Mon Feb 3 22:27:54 1997 From: deering@cisco.com (Steve Deering) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 14:27:54 -0800 Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: Dimitry Haskin wrote: > We're currently experience a very pure 6bone connectivity. Great! That's how it should be. Oh, you meant "poor", not "pure". :-( Never mind. Steve From dorian@cic.net Mon Feb 3 23:40:07 1997 From: dorian@cic.net (Dorian R. Kim) Date: Mon, 3 Feb 1997 18:40:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: New tunnel CICNet <-> VT Message-ID: A tunnel from CICNET to VT is now up, although it's still experimental rather than operational. (what's the difference you ask? I'm not sure. :)) VT is currently routed via static routes. 6bone#ping ipv6 vt Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0800:2023:2F8E, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 40/52/72 ms 6bone#traceroute ipv6 vt Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to vt (5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0800:2023:2F8E) 1 vt (5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0800:2023:2F8E) 48 msec 40 msec 80 msec -dorian From dorian@cic.net Tue Feb 4 15:13:40 1997 From: dorian@cic.net (Dorian R. Kim) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 10:13:40 -0500 (EST) Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Dimitry Haskin wrote: > To improve 6bone routing I propose to adopt the following > policies: > > - restrict the backbone sites to only those routers that > support RIPng; > > - make the backbone routers to use exclusively RIPng to > route between themselves; > > - the backbone routers can use static routes only to route > to their leaf clients; I'd also like to see phasing out of static routes to non-directly connected sites. > - the backbone routers should not advertise default prefixes > (e.g. ::0/0 5f00::/16) between themselves. It is ok > to advertise default prefixes to leaf clients; > > - each backbone router should maintain a RIPng tunnel with > two or more other backbone routers. I think these are excellent guidelines. -dorian From RLFink@lbl.gov Tue Feb 4 19:02:39 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 11:02:39 -0800 Subject: New Site In-Reply-To: <199701311804.NAA04960@ocarina.visc.vt.edu> Message-ID: David, I can't see your tunnel entry at Inner in the RIPE-NCC registry. I'll need that to put you on the 6bone diagram. Also, will you be bringing up another tunnel to a known backbone or transit site? Inner has not (to date) been identified as either. Thanks, Bob ========================================== At 10:04 AM -0800 1/31/97, David Lee wrote: >RIPE record: > >site: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VT) >location: Blacksburg, Virginia, US >loc-string: N 37-12.5 W080-24.4 >prefix: 5F05:2000:80AD:5800::0/64 >ping: 5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0800:2023:1D71 >tunnel: 128.173.88.82 198.82.204.73 Inner >contact: David Lee >status: operational since January 29, 1997 >remark: Routes will be added on request to dlee@vt.edu >remark: Other information at http://www.visc.vt.edu/ipv6 >remark: and at http://www.ee.ipv6.vt.edu/ipv6 >changed: dlee@vt.edu 970131 >source: RIPE > >Note that DNS delegation has not occurred yet and should relatively soon. >Currently, send your resolution requests to ocarina.ee.vt.edu. > >Tunnel ping information: > >ocarina:/home/dlee > ping anger.ipv6.inner.net >Using IPv6. >PING anger.ipv6.inner.net: 56 data bytes >sending 64 bytes to 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5 >Packet length= 64, header length= 40, priority= 0, flow label= 0 >Echo reply: 64 bytes from 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5: icmp_seq=0. time=53 ms >sending 64 bytes to 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5 >Packet length= 64, header length= 40, priority= 0, flow label= 0 >Echo reply: 64 bytes from 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5: icmp_seq=1. time=26 ms >sending 64 bytes to 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5 >Packet length= 64, header length= 40, priority= 0, flow label= 0 >Echo reply: 64 bytes from 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5: icmp_seq=2. time=25 ms >sending 64 bytes to 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5 >Packet length= 64, header length= 40, priority= 0, flow label= 0 >Echo reply: 64 bytes from 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5: icmp_seq=3. time=9 ms >sending 64 bytes to 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5 >Packet length= 64, header length= 40, priority= 0, flow label= 0 >Echo reply: 64 bytes from 5f05:2000:c733:2100::5: icmp_seq=4. time=10 ms >^C >----anger.ipv6.inner.net PING Statistics---- >5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss >round-trip (ms) min/avg/max = 9/24/53 > >-- >David C. Lee, EE PhD student/GRA - http://www.visc.vt.edu/~dlee - dlee@vt.edu >PHONE: 1-540-231-8398 | FAX: 1-540-231-3362 | LOCATION: 475 Whittemore Hall >Virginia Tech Information Systems Center, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061-0111 From RLFink@lbl.gov Tue Feb 4 19:07:23 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 11:07:23 -0800 Subject: 6bone connectivity In-Reply-To: References: <199702031700.MAA01476@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Message-ID: Dorian, At 7:13 AM -0800 2/4/97, Dorian R. Kim wrote: >On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Dimitry Haskin wrote: ... >> - the backbone routers can use static routes only to route >> to their leaf clients; > >I'd also like to see phasing out of static routes to non-directly connected >sites. I certainly agree on this point. Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Tue Feb 4 19:55:19 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 11:55:19 -0800 Subject: 6bone backbone route diagram now available Message-ID: I have added a hot button in the middle of the 6bone diagram backbone site bubble that points to a b/b links diagram. Take a look...interesting view of connectivity. What I need from backbone sites now is identification of which links are using other than static routing, and which one they use of course (mostly RIPng, a little IDRPv6, I suspect). Anyway, let me know what you think...is it worth maintaining this? Thanks, Bob From dhaskin@baynetworks.com Tue Feb 4 21:19:33 1997 From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 16:19:33 -0500 Subject: 6bone backbone route diagram now available Message-ID: <199702042119.QAA03396@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Bob, > > What I need from backbone sites now is identification of which links are > using other than static routing, and which one they use of course (mostly > RIPng, a little IDRPv6, I suspect). > Currently BAY sends and receives RIPng updates over the following backbone tunnels: BAY <-> G6/FR BAY <-> DIGITAL-CA/US BAY <-> NRL/US (132.250.90.3) -- not in RIPE yet BAY is also sending RIPng updates to WIDE/JP but we currently do not receive any RIPng routes from WIDE. > > Anyway, let me know what you think...is it worth maintaining this? > Definitely. > > Bob > Dimitry From Dorian R. Kim" SURFNET In-Reply-To: Message-ID: A tunnel from CICNET to SURFNET is now up. SURFNET is currently routed via static routes, with plans to move to RIPng. 6bone#ping ipv6 surfnet Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 5F04:4F00:C057:6E00:003C:00C0:4FC6:9CC7, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 128/132/136 ms 6bone#traceroute ipv6 surfnet Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to zesbot.ipv6.surfnet.nl (5F04:4F00:C057:6E00:003C:00C0:4FC6:9CC7) 1 zesbot.ipv6.surfnet.nl (5F04:4F00:C057:6E00:003C:00C0:4FC6:9CC7) 132 msec * 136 msec -dorian From reevo@alp.net Wed Feb 5 15:44:11 1997 From: reevo@alp.net (Andrea Rivetti) Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 15:44:11 +0000 Subject: 6bone map Message-ID: <32F8AACB.41C67EA6@alp.net> Hello, we are the managers of the IPv6 isle at POLITO/IT. First of all, we are running a RIPv6 tunnel with DIGITAL-CA which is our default route, so I think it's better to change our position on the map... We want to announce our web site at www.ipv6.polito.it which contains a reachability monitor at www.ipv6.polito.it/test/test.html bye Andrea Rivetti reevo@alp.net Andrea Spera spera@csp.it From crawdad@fnal.gov Wed Feb 5 15:14:41 1997 From: crawdad@fnal.gov (Matt Crawford) Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 09:14:41 -0600 Subject: Historic 6bone info In-Reply-To: "03 Feb 1997 07:49:47 PST." <"v03007806af1bb8bef109"@[128.3.9.22]> Message-ID: <199702051514.JAA20942@gungnir.fnal.gov> > >Does anyone have historic maps or registry info for the 6bone? I'm trying > >to map out how it's changed since it started. > > I never saved them when I generated new ones as it was a pain for > me to do so. Well, in that case I'll make available the few I saved: 6bone.960903.gif 6bone.960918.gif 6bone.960920.gif 6bone.961009.gif 6bone.961119.gif They will be temporarily available at http://www-dcg.fnal.gov/6bone/ _________________________________________________________ Matt Crawford crawdad@fnal.gov Fermilab PGP: D5 27 83 7A 25 25 7D FB 09 3C BA 33 71 C4 DA 6A From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 5 16:05:32 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:05:32 -0800 Subject: 6bone backbone links diagram change (version 2) Message-ID: 6bone backbone links diagram version 2: 1. added various RIPng notations for those links reported to me 2. added IDRPv6 notation on UNI-C/DK to G6/FR link 3. noted one-way RIPng on BAY/US to WIDE/JP link 4. made static (or yet uncharacterized) links be dashed to emphasize we would like them to be "solid" links :-) Have made no further judgement on whether a site should be a backbone site. I think this will sort itself out over time. General sentiment seems to be to keep this backbone links diagram going. Thanks, Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 5 16:01:20 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:01:20 -0800 Subject: 6bone diagram change (version 49) Message-ID: 6bone diagram version 49: 1. VT/US and SURFNET/US added with tunnels to CICNET/US 2. POLITO/IT rehomed to DIGITAL-CA/US (was CSELT/IT) Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 5 16:18:06 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:18:06 -0800 Subject: comments on David Meyers's RPSL draft Message-ID: I have seen no comments on this list regarding David Meyer's "Representing Tunnels in RPSL" internet draft. It is one of our working group tasks to provide feedback to the RPSL folk on this. Can anyone tell me what might have transpired on this topic? Thanks, Bob =========================================================== From: "David M. Meyer" Subject: RPSL extensions for tunnels To: 6bone@isi.edu Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 17:22:09 -0800 (PST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU Precedence: bulk Folks, I didn't get a chance to present this in the BOF, so here's the draft. Any comments appreciated. Dave ----------- INTERNET-DRAFT David Meyer draft-ietf-rps-tunnels-01.txt University of Oregon Category: Standards Track November 1996 Representing Tunnels in RPSL Status of this Memo This document provides extensions to the Routing Policy Specification Language [RPSL] to provide support for tunnels of various types. Internet Drafts This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the ``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). Abstract This document specifies the language and set of semantics describing tunnels in the Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL). It defines a new tunnel class, inet-tunnel, and a set of extensions to the inet-rtr class. An instance of the inet-tunnel class specifies endpoints for tunnels of various encapsulation types, including DVMRP [DVMRP], GRE [GRE], and IPv6 [IPV6]. This memo is a product of the Routing Policy System Working Group (RPS) in the Operational Requirements area of the Internet Engineer- ing Task Force. Submit comments to or the author. Introduction Tunneling is a fundamental networking technology that is used in a variety circumstances. A common use of tunneling is to incrementally deploy a new network layer protocol. The approach is to encapsulate ("tunnel") the new protocol through the existing network layer proto- col, usually IP. Examples of this approach include include the multi- cast backbone [MBONE], where multicast packets are encapsulated in IP packets using protocol 4 (IP in IP), and IPv6 backbone [6BONE], where IPv6 packets are encapsulated in IP packets using IP protocol 41 [V6TRNS]. Another use of tunneling is to force congruence between the existing (IP unicast) topology and some new topology. Due the special require- ments of IP multicast routing, the MBONE is also an example of this use of tunneling. This document describes extensions to RPSL to support general tunnel- ing mechanisms. The extensions support point to point and point to multipoint tunnels of encapsulation types, including DVMRP, GRE, and IPv6. In addition to the encapsulation, a protocol to run inside the tunnel can also be specified. Extensions to the inet-rtr class The inet-rtr class' peer attribute is extended to describe tunnels by assigning a new peer type (tunnel). The tunnel peer attribute has the following fields: inet-rtr: ... peer: tunnel source= encap= name= ... peer: tunnel source= encap= name= The type clause of then tunnel peer attribute describes the encapsu- lation on the tunnel. The defined encapsulation types are DVMRP [DVMRP], GRE [GRE], or IPv6 [IPV6]. The name clause refers to a tun- nel object (see below). If there are multiple tunnel peer attributes with the same name attribute, then the tunnel is a point to mul- tipoint tunnel. Note that a router can be the source of multiple tun- nels. Each inet-rtr tunnel peer instance has a mandatory name, source, and destination attributes. The tunnel source attribute must correspond to an ifaddr attribute for the inet-rtr instance. The inet-rtr instance below describes a DVMRP tunnel with source 204.70.32.6 and destination 204.70.158.61. The tag MBONE-TUNNEL-EUG refers to a tunnel instance (see below). The same router has a GRE tunnel. inet-rtr: eugene-isp.nero.net loacalas: AS4600 ifaddr: 204.70.32.6 masklen 30 ... peer: tunnel encap=DVMRP name=MBONE-TUNNEL-EUG 204.70.158.61 204.70.32.6 peer: tunnel encap=GRE name=GRE-TUNNEL-EUG 206.42.19.240 204.70.32.6 ... The inet-tunnel Class A tunnel is specified by an instance of the inet-tunnel class. The attributes of the inet-tunnel class are described below. inet-tunnel: tunnel-source: tunnel-sink: ... tunnel-sink: tunnel-protocol: tunnel-in: from accept tunnel-in: from accept ... tunnel-in: from accept tunnel-out: to [action [scope=;] [boundary=;] [dvmrp-metric=;]] announce tunnel-out: to [action [scope=;] [boundary=;] [dvmrp-metric=;]] announce ... tunnel-out: to [action [scope=;] [boundary=;] [dvmrp-metric=;]] announce inet-tunnel Class Attributes inet-tunnel: mandatory, single valued tunnel-source: mandatory, single valued, class key tunnel-sink: mandatory, single valued, class key tunnel-protocol: mandatory, single valued tunnel-in: mandatory, multi-valued tunnel-out: mandatory, multi-valued An instance of the inet-tunnel class describes a single tunnel (although the tunnel-source may be the source of multiple tunnels). The name attribute is a key that is used in an inet-rtr object to reference the tunnel object. The tunnel may be point to point or point to multipoint. A multipoint tunnel will have more than one tunnel-sink value. Each tunnel-sink must have corresponding tunnel-in and tunnel-out attributes. The tunnel-protocol is the protocol to run "inside" the tunnel. The values for tunnel-protocol include BGP, RIPv6, DVMRP, PIM-DM, and PIM-SM. See [SSMMC] for an application that uses BGP tunneled in GRE. The inet-tunnel class's tunnel-out attribute includes an action clause for which the currently defined actions include: (i). The minimum IP time-to-live required for a packet to be forwarded to the specified endpoint (in the case of multipoint tunnels, there may be per endpoint scopes), (ii). A boundary attribute describes a class of packets that will not be forwarded through the tunnel, and (iii). A DVMRP metric. These attributes are particularly relevant to multicast routing. The inet-tunnel class also has routing filter specifications which describe filters that are appropriate for the tunnel's routing proto- col. In the case of DVMRP, the filter specification can be the list of network prefixes accepted or advertised. Finally, an instance of the inet-tunnel class also has all of the administrative fields present in an aut-num class, including guar- dian, admin-c, tech-c, notify, mnt-by, changed, and source. Example In this example, the inet-rtr eugene-isp.nero.net has a DVMRP tunnel with the sink on the inet-rtr dec3800-2-fddi-0.SanFrancisco.mci.net. The tunnel object is called MBONE-TUNNEL-EUG. eugene-isp.nero.net will accept any routes. eugene-isp.nero.net will forward packets to the DVMRP tunnel if the packet's time-to-live is greater than or equal to 64. In addition, eugene-isp.nero.net will not pass any pack- ets that match the administrative scope boundary filter (in this case, 239.254.0.0/16). In addition, the inet-rtr eugene-isp.nero.net has a GRE tunnel represented by GRE-TUNNEL-EUG. inet-tunnel: MBONE-TUNNEL-EUG tunnel-source: 204.70.158.61 tunnel-sink: 204.70.32.6 tunnel-protocol: DVMRP tunnel-in: from 204.70.158.61 accept ANY tunnel-out: to 204.70.158.61 action scope=64; boundary={239.254.0.0/16}; dvmrp-metric=1; announce AS-NERO-TRANSIT guardian: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu admin-c: DMM65 tech-c: DMM65 notify: nethelp@ns.uoregon.edu mnt-by: MAINT-AS3582 changed: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu 961122 source: RADB inet-tunnel: GRE-TUNNEL-EUG tunnel-source: 204.70.158.61 tunnel-sink: 206.42.19.240 tunnel-protocol: PIM-DM tunnel-in: from 206.42.19.240 accept ANY tunnel-out: to 206.42.19.240 action scope=64; announce ANY guardian: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu admin-c: DMM65 tech-c: DMM65 notify: nethelp@ns.uoregon.edu mnt-by: MAINT-AS3582 changed: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu 961122 source: RADB Security Considerations Security considerations are not discussed in this memo. References [6BONE] See http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/ [DVMRP] T. Pusateri, "Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol", draft-ietf-idmr-dvmrp-v3-03, September, 1996. [GRE] S. Hanks, T. Li, D. Farinacci, and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC1701, October, 1994. [IPV6] A. Conta and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6", draft-ietf-ipngwg-ipv6-tunnel-04.txt, October, 1996 [MBONE] See http://www.best.com/~prince/techinfo/misc.html [RPSL] C. Alaettinoglu, et. al., "Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL)", draft-ietf-rps-rpsl-00.txt, October, 1996. [SSMMC] Y. Rekhter, "Auto route injection with tunnelling", NANOG, October, 1996. For additional information, see http://www.academ.com/nanog/oct1996/multihome.html [V6TRNS] R. Gilligan and E. Nordmark, "Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 1933, April 1996. Author's Address David Meyer University of Oregon 1225 Kincaid St. Eugene, OR 97403 phone: +1 541.346.1747 email: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu - end From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 5 16:14:45 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 08:14:45 -0800 Subject: new stats page from POLITO/IT added Message-ID: I have added Andrea Rivetti's and Andrea Spera's POLITO/IT ping stats page to the 6bone statistics page. Thanks to them for the effort! Bob From boggs@cs.colorado.edu Wed Feb 5 17:09:56 1997 From: boggs@cs.colorado.edu (Adam Boggs) Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 10:09:56 -0700 Subject: New tunnel Message-ID: <199702051709.KAA18639@nag.cs.colorado.edu> There is a new tunnel up from the University of Colorado (CU-BOULDER) to the University of Oregon (UO). Actually, it's been up for about a week now. It is currently routed with static routes with plans to move to RIPng. networks.cs:boggs> ping6 5F0D:E900:80DF:E000:0001:0060:3E0B:3010 PING 5F0D:E900:80DF:E000:0001:0060:3E0B:3010: 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=0 time=43.1 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=1 time=40.0 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=2 time=44.2 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=3 time=43.7 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=4 time=38.9 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=5 time=41.2 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=6 time=39.1 ms 64 bytes from 5f0d:e900:80df:e000:1:60:3e0b:3010: icmp_seq=7 time=42.1 ms --- 5F0D:E900:80DF:E000:0001:0060:3E0B:3010 ping statistics --- 9 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 38.9/41.3/44.2 ms networks.cs:boggs> -Adam Boggs University of Colorado, Boulder Undergraduate Operations From bmanning@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 5 17:39:39 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (bmanning@ISI.EDU) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 09:39:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: 6bone@isi.edu In-Reply-To: <199702051601.QAA32003@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk> from "Jonathan Day" at Feb 5, 97 04:01:39 pm Message-ID: <199702051739.AA04288@zed.isi.edu> > > I've got the start dates for all the ip6.int registrations. > > Would it be at all possible to obtain a list of start dates from > you? > 0.0.5.2.1.0.f.5.ip6.int. Jan96 0.0.5.b.6.0.f.5.ip6.int. feb96 0.0.5.0.d.0.f.5.ip6.int. feb96 0.0.0.3.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. Mar96 0.0.5.a.d.0.f.5.IP6.INT. Apr'96 0.0.3.b.c.0.f.5.ip6.int. july96 0.0.0.3.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. july96 0.0.d.6.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. july96 0.0.0.2.5.0.f.5.ip6.int. july96 0.0.4.c.9.0.f.5.IP6.INT. aug96 0.0.9.2.b.0.f.5.IP6.INT. aug96 0.0.b.f.4.0.f.5.IP6.INT. aug96 0.0.9.e.d.0.f.5.ip6.int. aug96 0.0.7.3.b.0.f.5.ip6.int. aug96 0.0.b.2.7.0.f.5.ip6.int. aug96 0.0.8.8.0.1.f.5.IP6.INT. aug96 0.0.7.1.B.0.F.5.IP6.INT. sep96 0.0.9.2.1.0.f.5.ip6.int. sep96 0.0.9.e.d.0.f.5.ip6.int. sep96 0.0.1.3.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. sep96 0.0.f.d.b.1.f.5.ip6.int. sep96 0.0.1.2.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. oct96 0.0.a.3.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. oct96 0.0.5.f.6.0.f.5.ip6.int. nov96 (no name servers yet) 0.0.f.2.2.0.f.5.ip6.int. nov96 0.0.b.8.6.1.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.1.1.c.b.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.0.0.e.2.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.f.4.b.0.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.3.6.7.0.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.7.f.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. dec96 0.0.d.b.2.0.f.5.ip6.int. jan97 0.0.9.c.4.0.f.5.ip6.int. jan97 0.0.1.9.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. jan97 0.0.2.1.3.0.f.5.IP6.INT. feb97 From meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu Wed Feb 5 18:05:41 1997 From: meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu (David M. Meyer) Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 10:05:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: comments on David Meyers's RPSL draft In-Reply-To: from "Bob Fink LBNL" at Feb 5, 97 08:18:06 am Message-ID: <199702051805.KAA18677@network-services.uoregon.edu> Bob, > I have seen no comments on this list regarding David Meyer's "Representing > Tunnels in RPSL" internet draft. I haven't see any comments either. The current plan is to fold this into the RPSL document. Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Dave From erik-jan.bos@surfnet.nl Wed Feb 5 19:13:46 1997 From: erik-jan.bos@surfnet.nl (Erik-Jan Bos) Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 20:13:46 +0100 Subject: New 6bone site: SURFnet in The Netherlands Message-ID: <20656.855170026@surfnet.nl> 6boners, SURFnet in The Netherlands, Europe is a new site on the 6bone. Currently we have a static tunnel with CICnet, but we plan to move to RIPng ASAP: zesbot root % /usr/inet6/bin/ping 6bone.cic.net PING 6bone.cic.net (5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=64 time=136.109 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=146.419 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=133.221 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=141.788 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=137.734 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=132.839 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=136.547 ms 64 bytes from 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=243.101 ms --- 6bone.cic.net ping statistics --- 8 packets transmitted, 8 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 132.839/150.969/243.101 ms Our box that you should be able to ping is called "zesbot.ipv6.surfnet.nl". FYI. __ Erik-Jan. From JOIN Project Team Thu Feb 6 10:01:05 1997 From: JOIN Project Team (JOIN Project Team) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:01:05 +0100 (MET) Subject: new tunnel JOIN <-> CICNET Message-ID: Hi Bob, we configured a new tunnel JOIN <--> CICNET: % traceroute -i6 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2 1 5f04:c900:8367:100:1:0:c8e:50c2 140 ms 139 ms 147 ms The RIPE entries are updated... All the best - Guido ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ JOIN -- IP Version 6 in the WiN Guido Wessendorf A project of DFN Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster Project Team email: Universitaetsrechenzentrum join@uni-muenster.de Einsteinstrasse 60 http://www.join.uni-muenster.de D-48149 Muenster / Germany phone: +49 251 83 31639, fax: +49 251 83 31653, email: wessend@uni-muenster.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From JOIN Project Team Thu Feb 6 12:53:36 1997 From: JOIN Project Team (JOIN Project Team) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 13:53:36 +0100 (MET) Subject: backbone links diagram Message-ID: Hi Bob, please can you annotate that IDRPv6 is used over the JOIN<>UNI-C tunnel in your backbone links diagram. What do you think about a new kind of line type (or other color) for IDRP links (or other routing protocols) between backbone sites? Thanks, all the best - Guido From 6bone@snad.ncsl.nist.gov Thu Feb 6 13:39:19 1997 From: 6bone@snad.ncsl.nist.gov (6bone@snad.ncsl.nist.gov) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 08:39:19 -0500 (EST) Subject: Additional change to NIST stats page Message-ID: <199702061339.IAA02650@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov> One additional minor change: - Sites that do not provided a pingable v6 address in their registry will not have their v4 tunnel address(es) pinged. Rob G. From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 6 14:48:13 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 06:48:13 -0800 Subject: addition of backbone tunnel for your map In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: At 10:47 AM -0800 2/5/97, Dorian R. Kim wrote: >There is a tunnel now between CICNET and JOIN. It's currently running static >routes of CICNET and JOIN prefixen only but will be RIPng as soon as JOIN >moves to RIPng (should be within week or so) Will add this tunnel today. >I'm sticking pretty much to policy described in CICNET RR object in setting up >tunnels, i.e. I'm only setting up tunnels to sites connected to CICNET or, >sites connected to ISPs with direct connection to CICNET, which are OARnet, >Michnet, ESnet, DIGEX and MCI. This is excellent policy. Thanks! Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 6 15:24:15 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 07:24:15 -0800 Subject: 6bone session reservation for the Memphis IETF Message-ID: As I've heard nothing to the contrary, I'm going to request a 1 hour slot for the 6bone meeting in Memphis. I will also specify no conflicts with IPng related activities. Thanks, Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 6 15:20:41 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 07:20:41 -0800 Subject: new 6bone diagrams Message-ID: 6bone overview diagram version 50 1. new tunnel from CU-BOULDER/US to UO/US 2. corrected SURFNET/US to SURFNET/NL sorry about that! 6bone backbone diagram version 3 1. new RIPng links 2. colors for RIPng and IDRPv6 link 3. some new static routes Welcome to CU-BOULDER, and the other new sites of recent days! Thanks, Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 6 15:32:01 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 07:32:01 -0800 Subject: Memphis IETF 6bone meeting planning Message-ID: Please ignore my last message. I thought this had been sent out, but I hadn't. I was waiting for some private area director comment on our BOF versus WG status. Subsequently Scott Bradner communicated back to me that given restructuring events at the IESG, they have still not processed us. Real soon now... Anyway, my questions for the group are below, so here goes: Given that the IETF has taken input from many of us on allowing shorter meetings when possible (as a way of extending the available time for meetings) we should consider a one hour time slot for the 6bone meeting in Memphis. The way I'm seeing the 6bone meetings, they attract so many visitors that we can't keep it intimate and small enough to have much meaningful unstructured dialog. Hence an hour may be worthwhile providing we are well structured on whay we want to cover/discuss well before we get there. So...any comments on this? My take on an agenda is: 1. Finish up discussion on topology, addressing and routing for a new 6bone infrastructure better suited to IPv6 testbed goals. 2. Finish up on what direction to take with the RIPE-NCC 6bone routing registry. 3. Decide how to proceed with an Internet-Draft outlining requirements for the new 6bone infrastructure. 4. Interact with RPS WG on extensions for "Representing Tunnels in RPSL" based on David Meyer's Internet-Draft. Thanks, Bob =========================================================================== =========================================================================== 6BONE CHARTER, GOALS & MILESTONES =========================================================================== Goals and Milestones: Jan 97 / Establish and submit initial charter, goals, and first year Goals and Milestones (this list). Jan-Mar 97 / Discussion on topology, addressing and routing for a new 6bone infrastructure better suited to IPv6 testbed goals. Jan-Mar 97 / Discussion on the future of the RIPE-NCC 6bone routing registry and how it relates to the RPSL work. Jan-Dec 97 / Continuing interaction with, and feedback to, the IPng working groups at the IETF based on 6bone experience. Mar-Apr 97 / Begin work on an Internet-Draft outlining requirements for the new 6bone infrastructure. Apr 97 / Begin to restructure the 6bone testbed based on discussions. Jan-Feb 97 / Interact with RPS WG on extensions for "Representing Tunnels in RPSL" based on David Meyer's Internet-Draft. Apr 97 / Decide what direction to take with the RIPE-NCC 6bone routing registry. Aug 97 / Finish work on Internet-Draft outlining requirements for the new 6bone infrastructure. Sep 97 / Interact with MBONED on their work for co-existence strategies for IPv4 multicast and IPv6 multicast. (This based on the MBONED milestones.) Dec 97 / Begin work on a document describing operational practices and experiences for the 6bone. ========================================================================== Draft 6bone Charter as presented at the BOF The 6bone Working Group is a forum for information concerning the deployment, engineering, and operation of ipv6 protocols and procedures in the global Internet. This activity will include, but not be limited to: - Deployment of ipv6 transport and routing in the global Internet via a "6bone" testbed to assist in the following. - Creation of "practice and experience" informational RFC documents that capture the experiences of those who have deployed, and are deploying, various ipv6 technologies. - Feedback to various IETF ipv6-related activities, based on testbed experience, where appropriate. - Development of mechanisms and procedures to aid in the transition to native ipv6, where appropriate. - Development of mechanisms and procedures for sharing operational information to aid in operation of global ipv6 routing. =========================================================================== =========================================================================== CALL FOR WG SCHEDULING AT MEMPHIS IETF =========================================================================== We will be taking scheduling requests as of today. The CUT-OFF for requesting slots is MONDAY, March 24, 1997. PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: - Wednesday has been broken down to one hour sessions. If you know that you need only an hour or less for your working groups, please indicate that to me and your session will be scheduled on Wednesday. If we do not have sufficient requests for one hour sessions, two one hour sessions will be combined for a normal two hour session. - Working groups will be allowed a MAXIMUM of two slots. If you feel you may need more, please let me know. You will get additional slots only if slots are available after agenda scheduling has closed (currently March 24). - BOF's WILL NOT be scheduled unless the AD approved request is accompanied by a full description (including name and acronym) and an agenda. The current agenda has sessions scheduled each night, we will have either Monday or Tuesday evening free but do not know which one at this time. With respect to working group and BOF requests, please note the following: 1. All scheduling requests MUST be sent to the appropriate Area Directors with a copy to: . ALL requests are subject to AD approval. Please be sure to specify the following: a. Working Group (or BOF) Name. (Include proposed BOF title - 35 or fewer characters please, and acronym - 8 characters max.); b. Area under which Working Group (or BOF) appears; c. Conflicts you wish to avoid (please be as specific as possible.) You will be notified of any conflicts which arise. Conflicts should then be resolved by the Chairs and the final outcome sent to: agenda@ietf.org d. Expected Attendance (attendance figures from December 1996 will be sent at a later time); e. Any special requests. (i.e., do you want your session MULTICAST - mbone slots cannot always be guaranteed; special seating arrangements). =========================================================================== =========================================================================== From bound@zk3.dec.com Thu Feb 6 18:39:11 1997 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (bound@zk3.dec.com) Date: Thu, 06 Feb 97 13:39:11 -0500 Subject: Memphis IETF 6bone meeting planning In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 06 Feb 97 07:32:01 PST." Message-ID: <9702061839.AA00786@wasted.zk3.dec.com> Bob, Regardless of topic or time. Please get a very larger room for our meeting. Lots of people will come. thanks /jim From hycsw@california.sandia.gov Thu Feb 6 19:17:08 1997 From: hycsw@california.sandia.gov (Helen Chen) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:17:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandia connected to the 6bone Message-ID: <199702061917.LAA13440@california.sandia.gov> Hi, I am glad to announce that Sandia, California is up and running on the 6bone. I've set up a tunnel to those with a file in the RIPE-NCC directory. Currently there are 1 tunnels up and running in both directions. It is to DEC-CA. If you wish to connect to us, please complete the tunnel from your end and send me a notice. Thanks. The RIPE database entry is as follows: site: Sandia National Laboratories, CA location: Livermore, CA, USA loc-string: ??? prefix: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300::/64 ping: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300:00f3:0000:f823:1ecf taichi6.ca.sandia.gov ping: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300:00f3:0800:2b91:e946 erin6.ca.sandia.gov tunnel 146.246.243.101 192.32.29.62 to Bay tunnel 146.246.243.101 192.31.7.104 to Cisco tunnel 146.246.243.101 204.123.2.236 to Digital-CA tunnel 146.246.243.101 198.128.2.27 to ESnet tunnel 146.246.243.101 132.250.90.5 to NRL tunnel 146.246.243.101 128.219.8.84 to ORNL tunnel 146.246.243.101 193.0.0.234 to RIPE-NCC tunnel 146.246.243.101 192.9.5.7 to Sun tunnel 146.246.243.101 131.179.96.167 to UCLA tunnel 146.246.243.101 204.162.228.3 to Xerox remark: contact: ipv6@ca.sandia.gov status: experimental changed: hycsw@ca.sandia,gov 2/5/97 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Helen Chen Phone: 510-294-2991 Sandia National Laboratories FAX: 510-294-1225 P.O. Box 969, MS9011/ORG 8910 INTERNET: hycsw@ca.sandia.gov Livermore, CA 94551-0969 UUCP: uunet!lll-winken!snll-arpagw!hycsw From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 6 21:32:59 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 13:32:59 -0800 Subject: Memphis IETF 6bone meeting planning In-Reply-To: <9702061839.AA00786@wasted.zk3.dec.com> References: Your message of "Thu, 06 Feb 97 07:32:01 PST." Message-ID: At 10:39 AM -0800 2/6/97, wrote: >Bob, > >Regardless of topic or time. Please get a very larger room for our >meeting. Lots of people will come. Will certainly try. Bob From hycsw@california.sandia.gov Thu Feb 6 22:08:53 1997 From: hycsw@california.sandia.gov (Helen Chen) Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 14:08:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandia connected to the 6bone Message-ID: <199702062208.OAA06153@california.sandia.gov> >> I am glad to announce that Sandia, California >> is up and running on the 6bone. I've set up >> a tunnel to those with a file in the RIPE-NCC >> directory. Currently there are 1 tunnels up and >> running in both directions. It is to DEC-CA. >> If you wish to connect to us, please complete the >> tunnel from your end and send me a notice. Thanks. > Tunnels are generally only published after the tunnel has been > tested. Speking for myself, I would never publish a tunnel that hadn't > been tested, and I would never create a tunnel without first asking for > permission directly from the individual responsible for the other end. Thanks for the pointer and my appologies! I will call individual sites for permissions and verify that all tunnels work before I announce again. I am withdrawing my previous announcement. Helen From hycsw@california.sandia.gov Fri Feb 7 23:14:11 1997 From: hycsw@california.sandia.gov (Helen Chen) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 1997 15:14:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandia's 6bone connection Message-ID: <199702072314.PAA05732@california.sandia.gov> Hi, Sandia now has a tunnel to the 6bone via ESnet. The following info is in the RIPE registry: site: Sandia National Laboratories, CA location: Livermore, CA, USA loc-string: prefix: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300::/64 ping: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300:00f3:0000:f823:1ecf taichi6.ca.sandia.gov ping: 5f01:2500:92f6:f300:00f3:0800:2b91:e946 erin6.ca.sandia.gov tunnel 146.246.243.101 198.128.2.27 to ESnet remark: contact: ipv6@ca.sandia.gov status: experimental changed: hycsw@ca.sandia.gov 2/7/97 Helen ------------------------------------------------------------------ Helen Chen Phone: 510-294-2991 Sandia National Laboratories FAX: 510-294-1225 P.O. Box 969, MS9011/ORG 8910 INTERNET: hycsw@ca.sandia.gov Livermore, CA 94551-0969 From RLFink@lbl.gov Mon Feb 10 18:05:13 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 10:05:13 -0800 Subject: 6bone diagram change Message-ID: 6bone diagram version 51: 1. change PSC/US to PROCESS/US (it's connected to DIGITAL-CA/US) 2. new site SANDIA-CA/US tunnelled to ESNET/US WELCOME TO SANDIA Livermore! 3. minor editing - no change in content. Thanks, Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Tue Feb 11 19:23:16 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 11:23:16 -0800 Subject: 6bone diagram change Message-ID: 6bone diagram version 52 made UNH a transit node with a tunnel to DIGITAL-NH. Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 12 15:29:05 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 07:29:05 -0800 Subject: new 6bone diagrams Message-ID: 6bone diagram version 53 and 6bone backbone lionks diagram version 4 added TELEBIT/DK as a backbone site as they are readying to handle leaf and transit site connections Note their IDRPv6 connectivity. Bob From reevo@alp.net Wed Feb 12 19:00:48 1997 From: reevo@alp.net (Andrea Rivetti) Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 19:00:48 +0000 Subject: New test page Message-ID: <3302135F.2781E494@alp.net> Hi, we just created a new test page. It is a real-time plot of the number of islands of the 6Bone and the number of reachable islands from POLITO/IT. Now we reach less than 50% of all the isles (we are running RIPv6) and I hope to see a 100% soon! :-) As you can see our router had memory problems yesterday... We hope to record the 6Bone explosion!! The URL is www.ipv6.polito.it/test/history.html a new image is generated every GMT night. regards Andrea Rivetti & Andrea Spera From KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu Thu Feb 13 18:35:00 1997 From: KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu (KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 13:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Looking for 6bone tunnel Message-ID: <3303605B.0AF2.0028.000@wpo> Hello, SUNYNet is looking for a tunnel to the 6bone. We are NYSERNet/SprintLink connected in Albany NY, USA. Any suggestions on where to tunnel to would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. Thomas Killian Network Analyst SUNYNet Operations State University of New York killiatd@sysadm.suny.edu From jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu Thu Feb 13 21:32:40 1997 From: jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu (Jimmy Kyriannis) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 16:32:40 -0500 Subject: 6bone tunnel request In-Reply-To: <3303605B.0AF2.0028.000@wpo> Message-ID: New York University would also like a tunnel to the 6bone. We're also NYSERNet/SprintLink customers, but out of New York City. Thanks. Jimmy --------------- Jimmy Kyriannis Assistant Network Manager, New York University Academic Computing Facility Phone: 212-998-3431 FAX: 212-995-4120 Internet Mail: jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu At 1:35 PM -0500 2/13/97, KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu wrote: >Hello, > >SUNYNet is looking for a tunnel to the 6bone. We are >NYSERNet/SprintLink connected in Albany NY, USA. Any suggestions on >where to tunnel to would be appreciated. > >Thanks in advance. > > >Thomas Killian >Network Analyst >SUNYNet Operations >State University of New York >killiatd@sysadm.suny.edu From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 13 22:51:14 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 14:51:14 -0800 Subject: Looking for 6bone tunnel In-Reply-To: <3303605B.0AF2.0028.000@wpo> Message-ID: Thomas and Jimmy, At 10:35 AM -0800 2/13/97, KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu wrote: >SUNYNet is looking for a tunnel to the 6bone. We are >NYSERNet/SprintLink connected in Albany NY, USA. Any suggestions on >where to tunnel to would be appreciated. AND At 1:32 PM -0800 2/13/97, Jimmy Kyriannis wrote: >New York University would also like a tunnel to the 6bone. We're also >NYSERNet/SprintLink customers, but out of New York City. For now the closest transit or backbone nodes are BAY/US (greater Boston area) or UNH/US (New Hampshire). I would suggest either of them : BAY/US dhaskin@baynetworks.com UNH/US Sebastien.Roy@unh.edu When we get a backbone/transit site in the NY area later on you can change. Thanks, Bob From jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu Sat Feb 15 01:50:15 1997 From: jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu (Jimmy Kyriannis) Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 20:50:15 -0500 Subject: RIPng problems with INRIA code over 6bone tunnel Message-ID: I realize this may not be a direct 6bone issue, but this seems like a good place to start since someone on this list may have experience with this problem. I'm trying to set up a 6bone tunnel to BAY/US. I can create a tunnel fine, and if I create a static route pointing to BAY, I can reach the 6bone. However, I can't appear to be able to get RIPng (via the ndpd-router daemon) to pick up any routes from the other side of the tunnel. I'm fairly sure this is my problem, as I can't find a great deal of documentation on the INRIA tunnel mechanism via the SIT interface. Could someone please e-mail me a sample /etc/rc.ipv6 (or the analogous script) that sets up their network interfaces and gets RIPng going? Thanks very much, Jimmy From pjb27@cam.ac.uk Sat Feb 15 15:15:35 1997 From: pjb27@cam.ac.uk (Philip Blundell) Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 15:15:35 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Linux IPv6 FAQ v3.0 outline - comments welcome! In-Reply-To: <199702150810.DAA03049@micron.notcom.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 15 Feb 1997, Eric Osborne wrote: > -Ports of applications in progress > -What stuff needs to be ported next.... > -IPv6-porters mailing list? > -is there one? should there be? I don't believe there is such a list, though I think it would be a useful thing to have. This is, I think, starting to stray towards the realm of the 6bone people rather than the Linux netdev list. Hopefully since the basic API is fairly standardised, IPv6-capable software will be interesting to people running non-Linux systems. Would anybody be interested in setting this list up? phil From bound@zk3.dec.com Sun Feb 16 00:36:01 1997 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (bound@zk3.dec.com) Date: Sat, 15 Feb 97 19:36:01 -0500 Subject: Linux IPv6 FAQ v3.0 outline - comments welcome! In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 15 Feb 97 15:15:35 GMT." Message-ID: <9702160036.AA06366@wasted.zk3.dec.com> Philip, The list already exists its the ipv6 implementors list. You can start this discussion on that list. To send mail to this list its at: ipv6imp@munnari.oz.au To join send mail to: ipv6imp-request@munnari.oz.au /jim From junkins@nwnet.net Sun Feb 16 16:45:08 1997 From: junkins@nwnet.net (Doug Junkins) Date: Sun, 16 Feb 1997 08:45:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: 6Bone changes for NWNet Message-ID: NWNet has changed the endpoint for our 6Bone tunnel from DIGITAL-CA and has added an additional tunnel to UOREGON (with two more tunnels planned at this time). In addition, we have switched to RIPng routing for all core connections. Our update RIPE entry is as follows: site: NorthWestNet location: Bellevue, Washington, USA loc-string: 47 35 2n 122 8 2w 5m prefix: 5F02:AD00:C050:0D00/64 ping: 5F02:AD00:C050:0D00:0001:0800:207F:049D ping: 5F02:AD00:C050:0D00:0001:0000:0C1A:C8A8 tunnel: 192.220.249.249 204.123.2.236 DIGITAL-CA - RIPng - operational tunnel: 192.220.249.249 128.223.222.11 UOREGON - RIPng - operational tunnel: 192.220.249.249 131.103.1.54 CICNET - RIPng - planned tunnel: 192.220.249.249 137.229.12.248 UALASKA - RIPng - planned contact: Doug Junkins status: operational remarks: nwnet-6bone-gw.nwnet.net is a Cisco 4000M remarks: will add tunnels to people with ipv4 connectivity to remarks: NorthWestNet, MCI, Sprint's Seattle POP, and UUNet's remarks: Seattle and Portland POPs. remarks: Please send connectivity problems and requests to the remarks: above contact changed: junkins@nwnet.net 970216 source: RIPE We will adding additional tunnels to other core sites and to leaf nodes in the coming weeks. - Doug / Douglas A. Junkins | Network Engineering \ / Network Engineer | NorthWestNet \ \ junkins@nwnet.net | Bellevue, Washington, USA / \ +1-206-649-7419 | / From Doug Junkins Tue Feb 18 05:29:36 1997 From: Doug Junkins (Doug Junkins) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 1997 21:29:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Tunnel NWNet <-> CICNet Message-ID: NWNet and CICNet have brought up a new RIPng tunnel. Ping results: nwnet-6bone-gw#ping ipv6 cicnet1 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 5F04:C900:8367:0100:0001::0C8E:50C2, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 152/177/208 ms nwnet-6bone-gw#trace ipv6 cicnet1 Type escape sequence to abort. Tracing the route to cicnet1 (5F04:C900:8367:0100:0001::0C8E:50C2) 1 cicnet1 (5F04:C900:8367:0100:0001::0C8E:50C2) 144 msec * 148 msec nwnet-6bone-gw# Our RIPE record has been updated accordiningly. - Doug / Douglas A. Junkins | Network Engineering \ / Network Engineer | NorthWestNet \ \ junkins@nwnet.net | Bellevue, Washington, USA / \ +1-206-649-7419 | / From bmanning@ISI.EDU Tue Feb 18 23:00:52 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (bmanning@ISI.EDU) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 15:00:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: f.5.ip6.int Message-ID: <199702182300.AA15874@zed.isi.edu> Hi there, AS 12 and AS5601 have ip6.int mappings delegated. ;; QUESTIONS: ;; 0.0.1.e.5.1.f.5.ip6.int, type = NS, class = IN ;; ANSWERS: 0.0.1.e.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. 129600 NS ratatosk.pdc.kth.se. 0.0.1.e.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. 129600 NS nic.cafax.se. 0.0.1.e.5.1.f.5.ip6.int. 129600 NS tarpon.pdc.kth.se. ... ;; QUESTIONS: ;; 0.0.c.0.0.0.f.5.ip6.int, type = NS, class = IN ;; ANSWERS: 0.0.c.0.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. 123117 NS EGRESS.NYU.EDU. 0.0.c.0.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. 123117 NS NYUNSB.NYU.EDU. 0.0.c.0.0.0.f.5.ip6.int. 123117 NS NYU.EDU. -- --bill From jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu Wed Feb 19 01:44:17 1997 From: jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu (Jimmy Kyriannis) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 20:44:17 -0500 Subject: New tunnel: NYU - BAY In-Reply-To: Message-ID: New York University has brought up a tunnel to the 6bone. At this time, we're statically routed to BAY; once the INRIA software supports RIPng over tunnels (should be in the next release scheduled for March) we'll support it. Here's the RIPE routing registry info: site: NYU location: New York, New York, USA prefix: 5f00:0c00:807a:4000:/64 ping: 6bone-gw.ipv6.nyu.edu 5f00:c00:807a:4000:40:0:c0fb:1625 tunnel: 128.122.64.5 192.32.29.62 BAY (static) contact: Jimmy.Kyriannis@nyu.edu status: operational Feb. 17, 1997 remark: Intel FreeBSD 2.1.6 with INRIA IPv6 implementation remark: expect to support RIPng with next release of INRIA remark: happy to add new tunnels upon request once supporting RIPng source: RIPE Tunnel ping test: 6bone-gw% ping6 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E trying to get source for 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E source should be ::128.122.64.5 PING 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E (5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e): 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=0 ttl=63 time=162.312 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=1 ttl=63 time=137.977 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=2 ttl=63 time=121.438 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=3 ttl=63 time=172.410 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=4 ttl=63 time=193.534 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=5 ttl=63 time=198.979 ms 64 bytes from 5f02:3000:c020:ae00:201d:0:c020:1d3e: icmp6_seq=6 ttl=63 time=192.391 ms ^C --- 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E ping statistics --- 7 packets transmitted, 7 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 121.438/168.434/198.979 ms 6bone-gw% Please let me know if you see any problems with the tunnel connectivity. Thanks to Bill Manning (ISI), the folks at INRIA and Dimitry Haskin (BAY) for their help in getting things set up. Jimmy --------------- Jimmy Kyriannis Assistant Network Manager, New York University Academic Computing Facility Phone: 212-998-3431 FAX: 212-995-4120 Internet Mail: jimmy.kyriannis@nyu.edu From guyd@uunet.pipex.com Wed Feb 19 10:43:00 1997 From: guyd@uunet.pipex.com (Guy Davies) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 10:43:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: New Tunnel UUNET/UK to CISCO/US Message-ID: Hi Folks, Thanks to the folks at Cisco for helping get the tunnel to UUNET UK up and running. Here is the RIPE ipv6rr object for the new site.... site: UUNET-UK location: Cambridge, UK prefix: 5f07:3700/32 ping: 5f07:3700:9e2b:8900:98::c92:145c tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.31.7.104 CISCO/US RIPng contact: IPv6 operations status: experimental remark: DNS operational for forward (ip6.pipex.net) and reverse remark: zones changed: Guy.Davies@uunet.pipex.com 970219 source: RIPE I plan to request some more tunnels in the near future as soon as I've got routing happy via Cisco :-) If someone could tell me the username/password to use to insert this object into the registry, I'd be grateful. Many thanks. Guy Guy Davies UUNET ---------- Internet House, 332 Science Park Operational Services Manager Milton Road Cambridge, CB4 4BZ email: guyd@uunet.pipex.com url: http://www.uunet.pipex.com/ tel: +44 (0)1223 250122 #4 fax: +44 (0)1223 250133 From bmanning@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 19 13:37:05 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 05:37:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: 0.0.2.1.3.0.f.5.IP6.INT. Message-ID: <199702191337.AA26987@zephyr.isi.edu> delegation has been pulled, pending a JANET decision. -- bill From dlee@visc.vt.edu Wed Feb 19 20:13:44 1997 From: dlee@visc.vt.edu (David Lee) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 15:13:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: Registry update for VT Message-ID: <199702192013.PAA10639@ocarina.visc.vt.edu> Updated record as follows: site: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University location: Blacksburg, Virginia, US loc-string: 37 12.5n 80 24.4w prefix: 5F05:2000::0/32 ping: 5F05:2000:80AD:5800:0058:0020:AF52:74CE tunnel: 128.173.88.84 131.103.1.54 CICNet: RIPng: operational/1st (up) tunnel: 128.173.88.84 192.31.7.104 cisco: RIPng: operational/2nd (up) tunnel: 128.173.88.84 198.82.208.50 VT-BEV: RIPng: experimental (up) contact: David Lee (Primary contact, EE) contact: Phil Benchoff (Secondary contact, CNS) status: operational since January 29, 1997 remark: Routes will be added on request to dlee@vt.edu. remark: Downstream/topologically close routes preferred. remark: Other information is at http://www.visc.vt.edu/ipv6 remark: or http://www.ee.ipv6.vt.edu/ipv6. changed: dlee@vt.edu 970219 source: RIPE From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 20 00:58:02 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 19 Feb 1997 16:58:02 -0800 Subject: 2nd Tshirt order list 17Feb97 1120 Message-ID: Current 2nd order list for 6bone Tshirts. I will give this a few more days to collect orders, then close it. Thanks, Bob ================================================================================ Banerjee, Partha 2 L address on file Behrle, Jeremy 1 XXL address on file Clark, Alex 4 M, 14 XL, 2 XXL address on file Dewell, Aaron 1 L, 1 XL address on file Fenwick, Wynn 1 XL, 1 XXL address on file Hoag, Andrew 1 XXL address on file Kyriannis, Jimmy 1 L, 1 XL address on file Levenberg, Richard 2 L address on file Mankin, Allison 2 M, 2 L address on file Markov, Igor 1 M address on file Martin, David 1 L address on file Metz, Craig 1 L address on file, prepaid Snyder, Larry 2 XL address on file Virgilio, Vincenzo 2 XL, 1 L address on file Whalen, Matthew 1 L address on file Winchcombe, Charlie 5 XXL address on file, prepaid ================================================================================ Please send NO checks/money until after you have received your Tshirt(s) in the mail. When you do send a check (only upon receipt of Thsirts) please make it out to Robert L. Fink and mail to: Robert L. Fink 3085 Buena Vista Way Berkeley, CA 94708 USA ================================================================================ From ben@tellus.co.uk Thu Feb 20 01:53:46 1997 From: ben@tellus.co.uk (Ben Crosby) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 01:53:46 +0000 Subject: USOT-ECS Ready Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970220015346.006954a8@smtp.tellus.co.uk> Just a quick note to say that USOT-ECS is ready to link to 6bone, and our links will be established over the next few days. We will be running a mirror of the following; Linux source from Kernel 2.1.x stream All IPv6 Network tools & patches Any FAQ's etc The aim is 24/7 availability. Anything relevant will go onto the site. We're working on a version of apache supporting ipv6, so there may well be a website to follow soon. Links accepted from .ac.uk and .co.uk / UKERNA sites. Thanks for all your help Ben. Follows USOT-ECS RIPE entry... site: USOT-ECS: Electronics and Computer Science location: University of Southampton, Hampshire, UK loc-string: ? prefix: 5f03:1200:984e:4100/64 ping: scorpio.ecs.soton.ac.uk (5f03:1200:984e:4100::1) tunnel: 152.78.65.209 131.111.193.104 UCAM-T tunnel: 152.78.65.209 148.88.153.38 ULANC tunnel: 152.78.65.209 130.88.12.119 UMAN tunnel: 152.78.65.209 194.105.166.254 IFB contact: CSLib Admin remark: This will probably change to a mailing list. status: final linking 970220 changed: cslman@ecs.soton.ac.uk 970219 source: RIPE Tellus Technologies Corporation E-mail: ben@tellus.co.uk Phone: 0976 393790 Fax: 01703 579365 From chris@cyphercom.com Thu Feb 20 08:25:50 1997 From: chris@cyphercom.com (Chris Wedgwood) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 03:25:50 -0500 Subject: New Tunnel CYPHER -> BAY-MA Message-ID: <199702200825.DAA01587@x.cyphercom.com> Subject says it all, here is the RIPE ip6rr object: site: CYPHER location: Manhattan - New York, New York. loc-string: Behind the flower pots. prefix: 5f02:bd00:d0d0:d800/64 ping: 5f02:bd00:d0d0:d800::a0:24de:9844 (x.ipv6.cyphercom.com) tunnel: 208.208.216.10 192.32.29.62 BAY-MA static contact: Chris Wedgwood status: operational remark: Seems to be slow and lossy... YMMV. remark: Looking for (fastish) reliable tunnels. remark: I twiddle a fair bit - it may be down at times. changed: chris@cyphercom.com 970219 source: RIPE If someone would kindly let me know the username/password I will upload this. Many thanks to Wenken Ling from BAY for setting this up. -Chris From Ivano.Guardini@cselt.stet.it Thu Feb 20 09:46:55 1997 From: Ivano.Guardini@cselt.stet.it (Guardini Ivano) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 10:46:55 +0100 Subject: New tunnel between CSELT <-> NRL Message-ID: Hi, there is a new tunnel between CSELT/IT and NRL/US and we have very low IPv6 packet loss. I have updated CSELT RIPE database entry: site: CSELT (Centro Studi E Laboratori Telecomunicazioni) location: Torino, ITALY loc-string: 45 03 52.2n 07 39 43.2e 250m prefix: 5f16:4d00::/32 ping: 5f16:4d00:a3a2:1100:0011:800:2071:d812 (SUN SPARC 20 IPv6 SUN for Solaris 2.5) ping: 5f16:4d00:a3a2:1100:0011:00a0:249d:338c (PC 386 IPv6 NRL for NetBSD 1.2) ping: 5f16:4d00:a3a2:1100:0011:0260:8ca3:384e (PC 486 IPv6 for Linux) ping: 5f16:4d00:a3a2:1100:0011:0:f822:45bf (PC Pentium IPv6 Inria for FreeBSD 2.1.5) tunnel: 163.162.17.77 129.88.26.1 G6 Static Routing tunnel: 163.162.17.77 193.10.66.50 SICS Static Routing tunnel: 163.162.17.77 198.128.2.27 ESNET Static Routing tunnel: 163.162.17.77 132.250.90.5 NRL Static Routing tunnel: 163.162.17.77 130.192.26.254 POLITO tunnel: 163.162.252.4 131.175.5.37 CEFRIEL tunnel: 163.162.252.4 194.242.0.68 SIRIUS-LAB1 contact: Ivano Guardini status: operational since December 4, 1996 remark: Sun SPARC STATION 20, IPv6 for Solaris 2.5 remark: We will be happy to set up new tunnels upon request changed: ivano.guardini@cselt.stet.it 19970220 source: RIPE Many thanks to Ron Lee (NRL) for his collaboration. Bye Ivano --------------------------------------------------- Ivano Guardini CSELT SpA via G. Reiss Romoli 274 Torino (Italy) Tel. +39 11 228 5424 Fax. +39 11 228 5069 e-mail: ivano.guardini@cselt.stet.it --------------------------------------------------- From JOIN Project Team Thu Feb 20 13:19:20 1997 From: JOIN Project Team (JOIN Project Team) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 14:19:20 +0100 (MET) Subject: New RIPng backbone links In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hello Bob, our links to backbone sites are all RIPng or IDRPv6 links now. Here the former static links running RIPng now (a few more blue lines in the backbone diagram :-) : JOIN-G6 JOIN-ESNET JOIN-CICNET JOIN-BAY All the best - Guido ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ JOIN -- IP Version 6 in the WiN Guido Wessendorf A project of DFN Westfaelische Wilhelms-Universitaet Muenster Project Team email: Universitaetsrechenzentrum join@uni-muenster.de Einsteinstrasse 60 http://www.join.uni-muenster.de D-48149 Muenster / Germany phone: +49 251 83 31639, fax: +49 251 83 31653, email: wessend@uni-muenster.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From RLFink@lbl.gov Fri Feb 21 02:09:26 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Thu, 20 Feb 1997 18:09:26 -0800 Subject: 6bone diagram changes Message-ID: 6bone diagram version 54: added NYU/US, USOT-ECS/UK, BT-LABS/UK, INFN-CNAF/IT Welcome to the new sites, and my apologies to older sites I have been slow to add to the diagram. I am still inaccurately representing the IFB/UK homed leaf sites, as there are actually some transits in use (I think). If BT-LABS and ENCOMIX could hook directly to IFB it might be cleaner...then again it might not. The IFB cluster seems to be all UK based (but for INR/RU) and it would be nice if the UK folk got together among themselves and decided a v6 topology that matches their v4 topology and then identified what is really backbone, transit and leaf. 6bone backbone links diagram version 5: added NWNET/US as a backbone site added various static and RIPng links We are making good progress in moving aaway from static routes. The goal should still be for an all dynamically routed backbone with appropriate links that match v4 topology. One problem emerging with all the new RIPng tunnels is that lots of routes are coming from places you might not want them. There are little or no filters in use and the backbone is a flat one hop backbone so hop metrics don't help you. I would encourage backbone sites to huddle on this and carefully craft filters and other metrics/policies as appropriate to keep their route distribution reasonable. Thanks, Bob From martin@mrrl.lut.ac.uk Fri Feb 21 17:22:24 1997 From: martin@mrrl.lut.ac.uk (Martin Hamilton) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 17:22:24 +0000 Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 20 Feb 1997 18:09:26 PST." Message-ID: <199702211722.RAA02961@gizmo.lut.ac.uk> --==_Exmh_-928583839P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Bob Fink LBNL writes: | I am still inaccurately representing the IFB/UK homed leaf sites, as there | are actually some transits in use (I think). If BT-LABS and ENCOMIX could | hook directly to IFB it might be cleaner...then again it might not. | | The IFB cluster seems to be all UK based (but for INR/RU) and it would be | nice if the UK folk got together among themselves and decided a v6 topology | that matches their v4 topology and then identified what is really backbone, | transit and leaf. To follow the v4 topology, us ac.uk nodes probably ought to be talking to the rest of the 6bone via routers at/near ULCC and Telehouse ? Any interest in this on our side of the water ? Cheerio, Martin --==_Exmh_-928583839P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: 2.6.3i iQCVAwUBMw3ZzdZdpXZXTSjhAQHJXgP+JPA8kV+0UHZgWnZsRs9cZhzsf3dnpHh+ TL40anOiFUzqzVxz4Yht5pXUyEONI+XYgVmCgyVWCRlBmGl3vaFUXbbyJqo0q4a1 NYSvVhdH6KbL9Z+chI+OoSRsjDgAIOlIHV+Rkl4+QDdCnNwtLrK2/7f6Y0qhKS/T iY0g+CEIKIQ= =93kp -----END PGP MESSAGE----- --==_Exmh_-928583839P-- From ben@tellus.co.uk Fri Feb 21 21:42:38 1997 From: ben@tellus.co.uk (Ben Crosby) Date: Fri, 21 Feb 1997 21:42:38 +0000 Subject: 6bone diagram changes Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970221214238.0069df30@smtp.tellus.co.uk> At 17:22 21/02/97 +0000, you wrote: >Bob Fink LBNL writes: > >| I am still inaccurately representing the IFB/UK homed leaf sites, as there >| are actually some transits in use (I think). If BT-LABS and ENCOMIX could >| hook directly to IFB it might be cleaner...then again it might not. >| >| The IFB cluster seems to be all UK based (but for INR/RU) and it would be >| nice if the UK folk got together among themselves and decided a v6 topology >| that matches their v4 topology and then identified what is really backbone, >| transit and leaf. > >To follow the v4 topology, us ac.uk nodes probably ought to be talking >to the rest of the 6bone via routers at/near ULCC and Telehouse ? Any >interest in this on our side of the water ? I agree. Is there any offical movement from ukerna regarding ipv6, or should we just go ahead in our own sweet way and deal with this amongst ourselves ? Regards, Ben. (USOT-ECS Sysadmin) Tellus Technologies Corporation E-mail: ben@tellus.co.uk Phone: 0976 393790 Fax: 01703 579365 From jcday@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk Sat Feb 22 15:29:30 1997 From: jcday@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk (Jonathan Day) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 15:29:30 +0000 (GMT) Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970221214238.0069df30@smtp.tellus.co.uk> from "Ben Crosby" at Feb 21, 97 09:42:38 pm Message-ID: <199702221529.PAA03640@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk> > I agree. Is there any offical movement from ukerna regarding ipv6, or should > we just go ahead in our own sweet way and deal with this amongst ourselves ? Hi Last I heard, UKERNA decided on a watching brief. (read: everyone else can do the dirty work.) IMHO, those of us on the 6bone in the UK should go ahead and sort things out as best we can. It's exceedingly unlikely there'll be any effort on the part of UKERNA for a long time. More importantly, from a research point of view, your best bet when applying for research grants is to do something new, and good papers written early will do better on the citation index than good papers written when everything's been done. It's sad when research has to be so mercenary, but it also means you can't wait for drifters. Jonathan From bmanning@ISI.EDU Sat Feb 22 17:00:17 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 09:00:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: <199702221529.PAA03640@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk> from "Jonathan Day" at Feb 22, 97 03:29:30 pm Message-ID: <199702221700.AA21486@zephyr.isi.edu> > > > I agree. Is there any offical movement from ukerna regarding ipv6, or should > > we just go ahead in our own sweet way and deal with this amongst ourselves ? > > Hi > > Last I heard, UKERNA decided on a watching brief. (read: everyone else can > do the dirty work.) IMHO, those of us on the 6bone in the UK should go ahead > and sort things out as best we can. It's exceedingly unlikely there'll be any > effort on the part of UKERNA for a long time. > > Jonathan > I will note that I will not delegate any of the IPv6 entry points under the JANET/UKERNA ASNs until they come up with some guidelines on how to do sub-delegations to member universities. This may impact some of the activities of UK insitutions since you can't use the JANET/UKERNA ASN in formulating your IPv6 high order bits. -- --bill From ben@tellus.co.uk Sat Feb 22 17:53:17 1997 From: ben@tellus.co.uk (Ben Crosby) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 17:53:17 +0000 Subject: 6bone diagram changes Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970222175317.00697c08@smtp.tellus.co.uk> At 09:00 22/02/97 -0800, you wrote: >> >> > I agree. Is there any offical movement from ukerna regarding ipv6, or should >> > we just go ahead in our own sweet way and deal with this amongst ourselves ? >> >> Hi >> >> Last I heard, UKERNA decided on a watching brief. (read: everyone else can >> do the dirty work.) IMHO, those of us on the 6bone in the UK should go ahead >> and sort things out as best we can. It's exceedingly unlikely there'll be any >> effort on the part of UKERNA for a long time. > > I will note that I will not delegate any of the IPv6 entry points > under the JANET/UKERNA ASNs until they come up with some guidelines > on how to do sub-delegations to member universities. > > This may impact some of the activities of UK insitutions since you > can't use the JANET/UKERNA ASN in formulating your IPv6 high order bits. Okey dokes, I cant say that I blame you given the problem, however this will have an impact on AC.UK as you say. Perhaps we (AC.UK sites) could get together and agree one site to hold the relevant information, conditional upon updating entries for other sites upon request and relinquishment of control to ukerna as soon as they become more interested in whats happening ? As far as I see that will benefit all of us.... Ben. E-mail: ben@tellus.co.uk Phone: 0976 393790 Fax: 01703 579365 From pjb27@cam.ac.uk Sat Feb 22 18:49:24 1997 From: pjb27@cam.ac.uk (Philip Blundell) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 18:49:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: <199702221700.AA21486@zephyr.isi.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Bill Manning wrote: > I will note that I will not delegate any of the IPv6 entry points > under the JANET/UKERNA ASNs until they come up with some guidelines > on how to do sub-delegations to member universities. > > This may impact some of the activities of UK insitutions since you > can't use the JANET/UKERNA ASN in formulating your IPv6 high order bits. A while ago it was suggested that it might be a good idea for us to avoid the JANET ASN for the time being, and use some other scheme to devise addresses. At the time I think the idea was to make routing easier at IFB, but it might solve some political problems as well. If nothing else, we could probably invent some fictitious ASN for the purposes of the 6bone, or persuade somebody in the UK with a non-JANET ASN (like IFB or UUNET) to delegate sub-prefixes to JANET sites. phil From bmanning@ISI.EDU Sat Feb 22 23:41:38 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 15:41:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970222175317.00697c08@smtp.tellus.co.uk> from "Ben Crosby" at Feb 22, 97 05:53:17 pm Message-ID: <199702222341.AA27813@zephyr.isi.edu> > >> and sort things out as best we can. It's exceedingly unlikely there'll be any > >> effort on the part of UKERNA for a long time. > > > > I will note that I will not delegate any of the IPv6 entry points > > under the JANET/UKERNA ASNs until they come up with some guidelines > > on how to do sub-delegations to member universities. > > > > This may impact some of the activities of UK insitutions since you > > can't use the JANET/UKERNA ASN in formulating your IPv6 high order bits. > > Okey dokes, I cant say that I blame you given the problem, however this will > have an impact on AC.UK as you say. Perhaps we (AC.UK sites) could get > together and agree one site to hold the relevant information, conditional > upon updating entries for other sites upon request and relinquishment of > control to ukerna as soon as they become more interested in whats happening ? > > As far as I see that will benefit all of us.... > > Ben. If you can all agree, then yes. -- --bill From guyd@uunet.pipex.com Sun Feb 23 15:00:56 1997 From: guyd@uunet.pipex.com (Guy Davies) Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 15:00:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: 6bone diagram changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Folks, If you are all still unable to get a sensible response from UKERNA/JANET then, given that we could delegate say /64 or /80 supernets, I think we, UUNET/UK, could provide the necessary entries. I'll confirm this with various parties in UUNET in the UK tomorrow and, if it's OK, let you know. We have 5f07:3900/32 and use two supernets within that (5f07:3900:9e2b:8900/64 and 5f07:3900:c2:8200/64). There's plenty of other uniquely addressable space in there ;-) I think, as I said in an email to most of the UK sites yesterday, it is worth the UK sites getting our heads together to organise a sensible UK topology. I guess the allocation of test address space would be an integral part of that. Regards, Guy Davies UUNET ---------- Internet House, 332 Science Park Operational Services Manager Milton Road Cambridge, CB4 4BZ email: guyd@uunet.pipex.com url: http://www.uunet.pipex.com/ tel: +44 (0)1223 250122 #4 fax: +44 (0)1223 250133 On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Philip Blundell wrote: > On Sat, 22 Feb 1997, Bill Manning wrote: > > > I will note that I will not delegate any of the IPv6 entry points > > under the JANET/UKERNA ASNs until they come up with some guidelines > > on how to do sub-delegations to member universities. > > > > This may impact some of the activities of UK insitutions since you > > can't use the JANET/UKERNA ASN in formulating your IPv6 high order bits. > > A while ago it was suggested that it might be a good idea for us to avoid > the JANET ASN for the time being, and use some other scheme to devise > addresses. At the time I think the idea was to make routing easier at > IFB, but it might solve some political problems as well. > > If nothing else, we could probably invent some fictitious ASN for the > purposes of the 6bone, or persuade somebody in the UK with a non-JANET ASN > (like IFB or UUNET) to delegate sub-prefixes to JANET sites. > > phil > > From s.mcdermid@ukerna.ac.uk Mon Feb 24 16:36:03 1997 From: s.mcdermid@ukerna.ac.uk (Stuart McDermid) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 16:36:03 +0000 Subject: 6bone diagram changes Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970224163553.422fcb90@hermes.ukerna.ac.uk> I belive that UKERNA is being unfairly treated here (but I would since I am biased etc.) UKERNA has set up a SIG devoted to IPv6 (and RSVP) which first met on the 15th of Jan 1997. To join the UKERNA IPv6 mailing list send an email to: UKERNA-IPv6-SIG-administrator@UKERNA.ac.uk It is a human on the other end so a simple message is OK. The feeling of this meeting was that anyone wishing to join the 6bone should do this, and that the SIG should monitor IPv6 without a major pilot project. This doesn't mean that UKERNA doesn't want to do something with IPv6 and is just sitting on it's hands but that is what people in the UK academic community that turned up at the SIG meeting told UKERNA. Now if this is different to what is required then please tell us then we can do something about it. Regards, Stuart At 15:29 22/02/97 +0000, you wrote: >> I agree. Is there any offical movement from ukerna regarding ipv6, or should >> we just go ahead in our own sweet way and deal with this amongst ourselves ? > >Hi > >Last I heard, UKERNA decided on a watching brief. (read: everyone else can >do the dirty work.) IMHO, those of us on the 6bone in the UK should go ahead >and sort things out as best we can. It's exceedingly unlikely there'll be any >effort on the part of UKERNA for a long time. > >More importantly, from a research point of view, your best bet when applying >for research grants is to do something new, and good papers written early will >do better on the citation index than good papers written when everything's >been done. It's sad when research has to be so mercenary, but it also means >you can't wait for drifters. > >Jonathan > > > -- ************************************************************** * Stuart McDermid, Infrastructure Section, Operations Group, * * Network Services, UKERNA, Atlas Centre, Chilton, Didcot, * * OXON, OX11 0QS. E-Mail: S.McDermid@ukerna.ac.uk * * Phone: +44 1235 822 231 Fax: +44 1235 822 399 * ************************************************************** From lougheed@cisco.com Tue Feb 25 06:14:43 1997 From: lougheed@cisco.com (Kirk Lougheed) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 97 22:14:43 PST Subject: cisco 6bone router changes Message-ID: <199702250614.WAA04308@yorkie.cisco.com> I've updated cisco's RIPE entry, enclosed below. If any of the connected sites running static routing wish to start speaking RIP to us, please drop me a line. Thanks, Kirk Lougheed cisco Systems site: cisco Systems location: San Jose, California, USA loc-string: 37 24 35.82n 121 57 21.12w -1m prefix: 5f00:6d00/32 ping: 5f00:6d00:c01f:0700:0001:0060:3e11:6770 6bone-router.cisco.com tunnel: 192.31.7.104 132.250.90.5 NRL rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 163.221.11.21 WIDE rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 198.128.2.27 ESNET rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 137.132.19.149 NUS-IRDU static experimental tunnel: 192.31.7.104 192.9.5.7 SUN static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 199.171.21.252 NETLAG static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 131.179.96.167 UCLA static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 129.99.237.71 NAS static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 128.223.222.11 UOREGON rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 204.162.228.3 PARC static experimental tunnel: 192.31.7.104 206.62.226.33 KOHALA static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 132.250.90.3 NRL rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 204.123.2.236 DIGITAL-CA static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 131.103.1.54 CICNET rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 194.226.128.99 KIT static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 192.170.45.2 HP static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 140.160.166.22 WWU static experimental tunnel: 192.31.7.104 206.129.65.250 NETGOD static operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 198.49.218.71 ASCI rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 203.253.3.204 SSU rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 192.87.110.60 SURFNET rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 128.173.88.84 VT rip operational tunnel: 192.31.7.104 158.43.137.157 UUNET-UK rip operational contact: status: cisco has been operational since 5 July 96 remark: Happy to add new RIPng speaking tunnels upon request. remark: Delighted to convert static routing to RIPng routing. remark: 6bone-router.cisco.com carries all ipv6 routes. remark: please report any problems to contact above. changed: 970224 source: RIPE From guyd@uunet.pipex.com Tue Feb 25 11:29:44 1997 From: guyd@uunet.pipex.com (Guy Davies) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 11:29:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Updates to UUNET-UK ip6rr object Message-ID: Hi Folks, I've just updated the UUNET-UK ip6rr object to reflect all our new tunnels. Thanks to all involved in getting RIPng working across them. Regards, Guy site: UUNET-UK location: Cambridge, UK prefix: 5f07:3900/32 ping: 5f07:3900:9e2b:8900:98::c92:145c 6bone-gw.ip6.pipex.net ping: 5f07:3900:c2:8200::c00d:3c4 swannee.ip6.pipex.net tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.31.7.104 CISCO/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.32.29.62 BAY/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.220.249.249 NWNET/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 194.182.135.253 TELEBIT/DK RIPng experimental tunnel: 158.43.137.157 130.225.231.5 UNI-C/DK RIPng experimental tunnel: 158.43.137.157 193.10.66.50 SICS/SE RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.87.110.60 SURFNET/NL RIPng operational contact: IPv6 operations status: operational since 20-Feb-97 remark: DNS operational for forward (ip6.pipex.net) and reverse remark: zones changed: Guy.Davies@uunet.pipex.com 970225 source: RIPE From jason@linux.aatech.com Tue Feb 25 22:29:49 1997 From: jason@linux.aatech.com (Jason Duerstock) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 17:29:49 -0500 Subject: Getting attached... Message-ID: <331367DD.7243@linux.aatech.com> I'm interested in getting attached to the 6bone. Where's the best place to get connected? Jason Duerstock System Administrator jason@ntalr.aatech.com From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 26 01:06:57 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 17:06:57 -0800 Subject: Getting attached... In-Reply-To: <331367DD.7243@linux.aatech.com> Message-ID: Jason, At 2:29 PM -0800 2/25/97, Jason Duerstock wrote: >I'm interested in getting attached to the 6bone. Where's the best place >to get connected? From the page I recently added to the 6bone pages: Status: RO ------------------ 20 February 1997 All 6bone sites designated as Backbone or Transit sites are willing to connect user/leaf sites if they are appropriately located. This means that the 6bone is strongly attempting to arrange its tunnels in a way that matches IPv4 physical topology as much as possible. To contact these Backbone or Transit sites to request a connection, go to the 6bone Overview Diagram: http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone-drawing.html and click on the site of your choice and use the contact email within. Failing this, please post email to the 6bone list for help and advice. ------------------- Bob From jason@linux.aatech.com Wed Feb 26 06:23:29 1997 From: jason@linux.aatech.com (Jason Duerstock) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:23:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Getting attached... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > All 6bone sites designated as Backbone or Transit sites are willing to > connect user/leaf sites if they are appropriately located. This means that > the 6bone is strongly attempting to arrange its tunnels in a way that > matches IPv4 physical topology as much as possible. > > To contact these Backbone or Transit sites to request a connection, go to > the 6bone Overview Diagram: > > http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone-drawing.html > > and click on the site of your choice and use the contact email > within. > > Failing this, please post email to the 6bone list for help and advice. I tried looking at the map and I didn't see anything that looked particularly close in topological terms. I'm connected through MCI in Pompano Beach, Florida. I guess the an ideal hook-up site would be in Atlanta, preferably connected via MCI too.. Any help would be greatly appreciated. :) Jason Duerstock jason@linux.aatech.com From stuart@pa.dec.com Wed Feb 26 07:16:22 1997 From: stuart@pa.dec.com (Stephen Stuart) Date: Tue, 25 Feb 97 23:16:22 -0800 Subject: Getting attached... In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 26 Feb 97 01:23:29 -0500. Message-ID: <9702260716.AA07958@nsl-too.pa.dec.com> > I tried looking at the map and I didn't see anything that looked > particularly close in topological terms. I'm connected through MCI in > Pompano Beach, Florida. I guess the an ideal hook-up site would be in > Atlanta, preferably connected via MCI too.. > > Any help would be greatly appreciated. :) Traceroute to the V4 addresses of the various backbone sites and see who is closest in number of hops and has the lowest latency and/or packet loss. You might want to do your traceroutes during the day, rather than at night, or sample at a couple times during peak and non-peak hours for your timezone, and the timezones of the backbone sites. Stephen - ----- Stephen Stuart stuart@pa.dec.com Network Systems Laboratory Digital Equipment Corporation From Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de Wed Feb 26 08:49:09 1997 From: Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Erich Meier) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 09:49:09 +0100 (MET) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? Message-ID: <199702261249.NAA26080@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Hi! Are there any plans to establish a DNS domain for the 6bone and its tunnel hosts/routers? I mean something like *.6bone.net (or .org) where fauern.6bone.net join.6bone.net g6.6bone.net cisco.6bone.net ... supply AAAA and A (and maybe MX) RRs for the tunnel nodes. Or maybe start with one to the new gTLDs (nasa.6bone.rec) ;-))) An advantage I can think of would be some kind of corporate identity for the IPv6 movement. We could set up a fixed set of mail aliases for tech contacts and so on. Bob could name his website www.6bone.net. And finally traceroutes would look cool... Comments? Erich -- Erich Meier Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de http://www4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~meier From IPv6 Operations Wed Feb 26 13:14:06 1997 From: IPv6 Operations (Guy Davies) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 13:14:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Further updates to UUNET-UK Message-ID: Hi Folks, Following another fairly busy day and with the help of people at UNI-C/DK, TELEBIT/DK, IFB/UK and KIT/KZ, we have now got the following ip6rr object. site: UUNET-UK location: Cambridge, UK prefix: 5f07:3900/32 ping: 5f07:3900:9e2b:8900:98::c92:145c 6bone-gw.ip6.pipex.net ping: 5f07:3900:c2:8200::c00d:3c4 swannee.ip6.pipex.net tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.31.7.104 CISCO/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.32.29.62 BAY/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.220.249.249 NWNET/US RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 194.182.135.253 TELEBIT/DK RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 194.105.166.254 IFB/UK RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 130.225.231.5 UNI-C/DK RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 193.10.66.50 SICS/SE RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 192.87.110.60 SURFNET/NL RIPng operational tunnel: 158.43.137.157 194.226.128.99 KIT/KZ static operational contact: IPv6 operations status: operational since 20-Feb-97 remark: DNS operational for forward (ip6.pipex.net) and reverse remark: zones remark: Willing to add tunnels on request changed: Guy.Davies@uunet.pipex.com 970226 source: RIPE Anyone wishing to setup a tunnel to UUNET-UK should email ipv6@uunet.pipex.com and I'll get back in touch. Regards, Guy Guy Davies UUNET ---------- Internet House, 332 Science Park Operational Services Manager Milton Road Cambridge, CB4 4BZ email: guyd@uunet.pipex.com url: http://www.uunet.pipex.com/ tel: +44 (0)1223 250122 #4 fax: +44 (0)1223 250133 From bmanning@ISI.EDU Wed Feb 26 14:15:46 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:15:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: <199702261249.NAA26080@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> from "Erich Meier" at Feb 26, 97 09:49:09 am Message-ID: <199702261415.AA22056@zephyr.isi.edu> > > Hi! > > Are there any plans to establish a DNS domain for the 6bone and its tunnel > hosts/routers? I mean something like *.6bone.net (or .org) where This approach is really very hard to coordinate. Most sites have created subdomains of the form ipv6.site.tld to hold the AAAA records. -- --bill From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 26 14:22:54 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 06:22:54 -0800 Subject: Getting attached... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jason, At 10:23 PM -0800 2/25/97, Jason Duerstock wrote: >On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > >> All 6bone sites designated as Backbone or Transit sites are willing to >> connect user/leaf sites if they are appropriately located. This means that >> the 6bone is strongly attempting to arrange its tunnels in a way that >> matches IPv4 physical topology as much as possible. >> >> To contact these Backbone or Transit sites to request a connection, go to >> the 6bone Overview Diagram: >> >> http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone-drawing.html >> >> and click on the site of your choice and use the contact email >> within. >> >> Failing this, please post email to the 6bone list for help and advice. > >I tried looking at the map and I didn't see anything that looked >particularly close in topological terms. I'm connected through MCI in >Pompano Beach, Florida. I guess the an ideal hook-up site would be in >Atlanta, preferably connected via MCI too.. > >Any help would be greatly appreciated. :) Then I would suggest using DIGITAL-CA, NRL or CISCO until more happens in the the southeast. Bob From RLFink@lbl.gov Wed Feb 26 15:11:43 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 07:11:43 -0800 Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: <199702261249.NAA26080@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Message-ID: Erich, Though this sounds neat from a PR point of view, it goes against the way the Internet is structured today. It takes many nets and sites to make up the Internet, and each has its own identity. That identity shouldn't really be any different that their current identity. It also implies some central name registry dealing with the name and number space for everyone and I sure don't want to be in that business. Also, it implies that IPv6 is somehow different (and very externally visible) than IPv4. From my point of view, IPv6 will succeed when people use it and haven't a clue that they are using it. That is, it is literally an automatic thing that happens well below their high level view of the Internet. I prattle on...others will certainly have an opinion, and it may certainly be different than mine. Thanks for bringing it up as it is a point of view that should be discussed. Bob ============================================= At 12:49 AM -0800 2/26/97, Erich Meier wrote: >Hi! > >Are there any plans to establish a DNS domain for the 6bone and its tunnel >hosts/routers? I mean something like *.6bone.net (or .org) where > fauern.6bone.net > join.6bone.net > g6.6bone.net > cisco.6bone.net > ... >supply AAAA and A (and maybe MX) RRs for the tunnel nodes. > >Or maybe start with one to the new gTLDs (nasa.6bone.rec) ;-))) > >An advantage I can think of would be some kind of corporate identity for the >IPv6 movement. We could set up a fixed set of mail aliases for tech contacts >and so on. Bob could name his website www.6bone.net. And finally traceroutes >would look cool... > >Comments? > >Erich >-- >Erich Meier Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de > http://www4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~meier From lpz@nautique.epm.ornl.gov Wed Feb 26 15:29:06 1997 From: lpz@nautique.epm.ornl.gov (Lawrence MacIntyre) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 10:29:06 -0500 Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? References: <199702261415.AA22056@zephyr.isi.edu> Message-ID: <331456C2.41C6@nautique.epm.ornl.gov> Bill Manning wrote: > > > > > Hi! > > > > Are there any plans to establish a DNS domain for the 6bone and its tunnel > > hosts/routers? I mean something like *.6bone.net (or .org) where > > This approach is really very hard to coordinate. Most sites have created > subdomains of the form > > ipv6.site.tld > > to hold the AAAA records. This is what we did. We have an ipv6.ornl.gov domain. -- Lawrence ~ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Lawrence MacIntyre Oak Ridge National Laboratory 423.574.8696 lpz@ornl.gov http://www.epm.ornl.gov/~lpz lpz@nautique.epm.ornl.gov From Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de Wed Feb 26 16:33:06 1997 From: Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Erich Meier) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 17:33:06 +0100 (MET) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: <199702261415.AA22056@zephyr.isi.edu> from Bill Manning at "Feb 26, 97 06:15:46 am" Message-ID: <199702261633.RAA06728@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> > > > > Hi! > > > > Are there any plans to establish a DNS domain for the 6bone and its tunnel > > hosts/routers? I mean something like *.6bone.net (or .org) where > > This approach is really very hard to coordinate. Most sites have created > subdomains of the form > > ipv6.site.tld > > to hold the AAAA records. This is certainly true. But a single DNS domain with only the AAAA RR of the tunnel router and an MX for the tech contact would be manageable (we have currently 106 entries in the RIPE registry) I think. Erich -- Erich Meier Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de http://www4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~meier From Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de Wed Feb 26 16:55:30 1997 From: Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Erich Meier) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 17:55:30 +0100 (MET) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: from Bob Fink LBNL at "Feb 26, 97 07:11:43 am" Message-ID: <199702261655.RAA07461@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Bob, > Though this sounds neat from a PR point of view, it goes against the way > the Internet is structured today. It takes many nets and sites to make up > the Internet, and each has its own identity. That identity shouldn't > really be any different that their current identity. This is true if you consider the 6bone an "official and long-lasting" service. (see below). A corporate identity would be a big ease whenever someone asks you "How does this IPv6 thingy work?" or "How do I hookup?". I think it would motivate sites to take part and keep their tunnels up - it's rather disappoin- ting to look at the current tunnel stats... > It also implies some central name registry dealing with the name and number > space for everyone and I sure don't want to be in that business. Maintaining one (or two) records per site would not be so much work I guess. But I don't have that much experience in running such a "registry". > Also, it implies that IPv6 is somehow different (and very externally > visible) than IPv4. From my point of view, IPv6 will succeed when people > use it and haven't a clue that they are using it. That is, it is literally > an automatic thing that happens well below their high level view of the > Internet. I absolutely agree. But I consider the 6bone a thing that will vanish in the not-so-far-away future. OK, the MBone folks said this too, but there is more operational pressure that will force people to deploy IPv6. But I admit, a single DNS domain for the tunnel routers would be "syntactic sugar" and would never be needed for operational issues. Though it would be a nice thing for marketing issues... Regards, Erich -- Erich Meier Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de http://www4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de/~meier From KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu Wed Feb 26 17:05:00 1997 From: KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu (KILLIATD@sysadm.suny.edu) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 12:05 -0500 (EST) Subject: New tunnel: SUNYNET - BAY Message-ID: <33146CB0.0AF2.0CB8.000@wpo> SUNYNet (State Univ. of New York) has brought up a tunnel to the BAY 6bone site in Mass. It is currently statically routed, but will be moving to RIPng. Here's the RIPE entry : site: SUNYNet Operations location: Albany, NY, USA prefix: 5F06:F900:8DFE:0100::/64 ping: 5F06:F900:8DFE:0100::0001 ping: 5F06:F900:8DFE:0100::8DFE:01E1 tunnel: 141.254.1.225 192.32.29.62 BAY, USA Static Routing contact: Thomas Killian contact: Network Operations status: operational since February 25, 1997 remark: platform: Bay Networks ASN changed: killiatd@sysadm.suny.edu 970226 source: RIPE Tunnel ping test : lab>ping -r5 -ipv6 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E IPV6 ping (If 3): [5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E] is alive (size = 16 bytes) IPV6 ping (If 3): [5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E] is alive (size = 16 bytes) IPV6 ping (If 3): [5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E] is alive (size = 16 bytes) IPV6 ping (If 3): [5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E] is alive (size = 16 bytes) IPV6 ping (If 3): [5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E] is alive (size = 16 bytes) Thanks to Dimitry Haskin at Bay for the assistance in setting this up. Tom Killian From dhaskin@baynetworks.com Wed Feb 26 18:58:30 1997 From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 13:58:30 -0500 Subject: updated RIPE record Message-ID: <199702261858.NAA02312@pobox.engeast.BayNetworks.COM> Hi, I've updated the Bay's RIPE registry record with new tunnel information. site: Bay Networks location: Billerica, Massachusetts, USA prefix: 5F02:3000:C020:AE00::/64 ping: 5F02:3000:C020:AE00::0001 ping: 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D::0001 ping: 5F02:3000:C020:AE00:201D:0000:C020:1D3E tunnel: 192.32.29.62 132.177.118.22 UNH, USA, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 130.225.231.5 UNI-C, Denmark, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 128.176.191.66 JOIN, Germany, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 129.88.26.2 G6, France, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 163.221.11.21 WIDE, Japan, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 133.153.22.100 SUMITOMO/JP, Japan, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 204.123.2.236 DIGITAL-CA, USA, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 141.251.199.2 BAY-FRANCE, France, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 134.177.128.75 BAY-CA, USA, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 158.43.137.157 UUNET-UK, UK, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 132.250.90.3 NRL, USA, RIPng tunnel: 192.32.29.62 207.19.82.8 SBCTRI, Austin, USA, Static Routing tunnel: 192.32.29.62 128.122.64.5 NYU, New York, USA, Static Routing tunnel: 192.32.29.62 141.254.1.225 SUNYNet, Albany, USA, Static Routing tunnel: 192.32.29.62 208.208.216.10 CYPHER, NY, USA, Static Routing tunnel: 192.32.29.62 140.129.142.99 TNJC-TW, Taiwan, Static Routing contact: Wenken Ling contact: Dimitry Haskin status: operational since June 1996 remark: platform: ASN remark: will add new tunnels upon request remark: carries all 6-bone routes remark: please report any problems to contacts above changed: dhaskin@baynetworks.com 970226 source: RIPE Dimitry From lf@elemental.net Thu Feb 27 00:41:09 1997 From: lf@elemental.net (Lars Fenneberg) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 01:41:09 +0100 (MET) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: <199702261249.NAA26080@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> from "Erich Meier" at Feb 26, 97 09:49:09 am Message-ID: Hi all! You, Erich Meier, said: > Bob could name his website www.6bone.net. I think this would be a very good idea. I know that there is www.mbone.de here in Germany which carries MBONE related info and there's www.perl.org and I think www.sendmail.org. So what about www.6bone.net or www.6bone.org? I would suggest www.6bone.net. If there is consensus on this idea I would volunteer to register the domain (and pay for it) and run the neccessary nameservers. Lars. -- Lars Fenneberg, lf@elemental.net fingerprint D1 28 F1 FF 3C 6B C0 27 CC 9C 6C 09 34 0A 55 18 From stuart@pa.dec.com Thu Feb 27 00:59:24 1997 From: stuart@pa.dec.com (Stephen Stuart) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 97 16:59:24 -0800 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <9702270059.AA01411@nsl-too.pa.dec.com> Some configuration errors in RIP routes to leaf nodes were corrected; thanks to Kirk Lougheed at cisco for pointing them out. We brought up a backbone RIP tunnel to UUNET-UK; thanks to Guy Davies for handling the UUNET-UK end. Stephen From RLFink@lbl.gov Thu Feb 27 02:41:29 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 18:41:29 -0800 Subject: dialup to the 6bone ?? Message-ID: I am forwarding this to the mailer as I cannot answer this one. Can anyone (does anyone) handle IPv6 over PPP dialup yet? Thanks, Bob ============================= >Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:39:43 -0800 >From: Kurt Ames >Reply-To: cassady@earthlink.net >Organization: Admin Kit Investigator >MIME-Version: 1.0 >To: RLFink@lbl.gov >Subject: 6BONE > >Mr. Fink, >I pose a qestion to you that might seem irritating. I attended CSU >Monterey Bay last year and started a project at the school, the MBone. >With much help from Donald Brutzman and the IIRG working group at the >Naval Post Graduate School I was successful in tunneling CSUMB and NPS. >Is it possible or even reasonable to konnect my home system, a school >packaged system from Apple with a 14.4 modem, to the 6BONE? I would >obviously need a ISP with appropriate tunneling. I know of no such >public provider. A software beta release was in the works last year for >the PC and Mac to recieve/not send video and audio. Is there any hope >for me to get in on the 6Bone? >Cassady > From bmanning@ISI.EDU Thu Feb 27 05:57:19 1997 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 21:57:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: dialup to the 6bone ?? In-Reply-To: from "Bob Fink LBNL" at Feb 26, 97 06:41:29 pm Message-ID: <199702270557.AA04008@zephyr.isi.edu> It seems that he might be confusing Mbone with 6bone. > > I am forwarding this to the mailer as I cannot answer this one. > > Can anyone (does anyone) handle IPv6 over PPP dialup yet? > > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > ============================= > >Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 01:39:43 -0800 > >From: Kurt Ames > >Reply-To: cassady@earthlink.net > >Organization: Admin Kit Investigator > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >To: RLFink@lbl.gov > >Subject: 6BONE > > > >Mr. Fink, > >I pose a qestion to you that might seem irritating. I attended CSU > >Monterey Bay last year and started a project at the school, the MBone. > >With much help from Donald Brutzman and the IIRG working group at the > >Naval Post Graduate School I was successful in tunneling CSUMB and NPS. > >Is it possible or even reasonable to konnect my home system, a school > >packaged system from Apple with a 14.4 modem, to the 6BONE? I would > >obviously need a ISP with appropriate tunneling. I know of no such > >public provider. A software beta release was in the works last year for > >the PC and Mac to recieve/not send video and audio. Is there any hope > >for me to get in on the 6Bone? > >Cassady > > > > > -- --bill From Alain.Durand@imag.fr Thu Feb 27 11:18:45 1997 From: Alain.Durand@imag.fr (Alain Durand) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:18:45 +0100 Subject: dialup to the 6bone ?? In-Reply-To: Bob Fink LBNL "dialup to the 6bone ??" (Feb 26, 6:41pm) References: Message-ID: <970227121845.ZM9092@rama.imag.fr> On Feb 26, 6:41pm, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > Subject: dialup to the 6bone ?? > I am forwarding this to the mailer as I cannot answer this one. > > Can anyone (does anyone) handle IPv6 over PPP dialup yet? We are working on ppp and it should be ready for the next release of IPv6 INRIA code sometime in march. I do not know about the other implementations. But if we ever set up such a service, it'll probably be restricted to internal use... - Alain From robert@digi-data.com Thu Feb 27 16:43:11 1997 From: robert@digi-data.com (Robert Honore) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 12:43:11 -0400 Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? References: <199702261249.NAA26080@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> Message-ID: <97Feb27.084132gmt-0400.19591@odin.digi-data.com> Dear Erich, Now there is an idea worth pursuing. I am still setting up my site and should be asking for a tunnel soon. My question on that though is whether we have a working version of BIND or something similar that can return the AAAA and A records for us. I'd be glad to find out. -- Yours sincerely, Robert Honore robert@digi-data.com Phone: 623 6658 Fax: 623 0978 Snail Mail: Digi Data systems limited, 96 Wrightson Road, Trinidad, W. I. > Take care of what IS. The APPEARANCES will take care of themselves. From Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de Thu Feb 27 12:59:15 1997 From: Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Erich Meier) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 13:59:15 +0100 (MET) Subject: DNS domain for 6bone? In-Reply-To: <97Feb27.084132gmt-0400.19591@odin.digi-data.com> from Robert Honore at "Feb 27, 97 12:43:11 pm" Message-ID: <199702271259.NAA05059@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> > > Dear Erich, > Now there is an idea worth pursuing. I am still setting up my site and > should be asking for a tunnel soon. My question on that though is > whether we have a working version of BIND or something similar that can > return the AAAA and A records for us. I'd be glad to find out. Sure, there is no problem with that. Just follow the steps shown on Bob's webpages (http://www-cnr.lbl.gov/6bone/) to hookup to the 6bone. This includes choosing a RFC1897 compliant IPv6 testing prefix for your site and finding an "upper layer" nameserver that provides reverse lookup delegations to you. The location of this nameserver depends on your AS number or better if someone has set up a IPv6 reverse lookup nameserver for your AS number yet. If you're the first one in your AS, then you should contact Bill Manning (manning@isi.edu) for a delegation. Bind supports AAAA records starting with version 4.9.4. Hope this helps, Erich From unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk Thu Feb 27 14:23:04 1997 From: unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk (Gudrun R. Dalgeir) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 15:23:04 +0100 (MET) Subject: Updated Ripe entry for UNI-C Message-ID: Hello, From UNI-C there are two new tunnels, one to ECRC with static routing, and one to UUNET-UK with RIPng routing. Our backbone tunnels to Bay, G6 and SICS have been changed to run RIPng. Our Ripe entry is now site: UNI-C, DENET location: Copenhagen, Denmark prefix: 5f07:2b00::/32 ping: unvea6.ipv6.uni-c.dk, 5f07:2b00:82e1:e700:5:c0:3302:31 tunnel: 130.225.231.5 193.10.66.50 SICS RIPng, experimental tunnel: 130.225.231.5 194.182.135.253 Telebit, IDRPv6, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 128.176.191.66 JOIN ::/0, IDRPv6, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 129.88.26.2 G6, RIPng, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 132.177.118.22 UNH static, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 192.71.20.139 ERA static, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 192.32.29.62 Bay Networks RIPng, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 141.1.2.3 ECRC static, operational tunnel: 130.225.231.5 158.43.137.157 UUNET-UK RIPng, operational contact: Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk remark: http://www6.ipv6.uni-c.dk changed: gudrun.dalgeir@uni-c.dk 970227 source: RIPE regards, ---------------- oo000oo ---------------------------------- Gudrun Dalgeir phone : (+) 45 35878532 UNI-C fax : (+) 45 35878890 Vermundsgade 5 e-mail : Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk DK-2100 Kbh. O ----------------------------------------------------------- From tdyas@xenophanes.rutgers.edu Thu Feb 27 23:33:41 1997 From: tdyas@xenophanes.rutgers.edu (Tom Dyas) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 97 18:33:41 EST Subject: request for a connection Message-ID: I am interested in getting a connection to the 6bone for Rutgers University. Some minor questions (probably some stupid ones as well): 1) Is there anybody close to Central New Jersey (New Brunswick specifically) that would be willing to provide a tunnel? 2) I picked my RFC1897 prefix to be 5F02:BD00:8006:0000::/64 since the provider ASN (UUNet) is 701. Now, for the IPv4 network part of the prefix, I used 800600 as the basis since Rutgers has the Class B 128.6.0.0. But we also have the Class B 165.230.0.0, so should the prefix reflect that in some way as well? (Or I am just being extremly paranoid and it does not matter what I choose as long as it is consistent within Rutgers?) Tom Tom Dyas tdyas@noc.rutgers.edu Network Operations Group http://www-no.rutgers.edu/~tdyas/ Rutgers University Computing Services 908-445-5683 From jason@linux.aatech.com Fri Feb 28 01:15:51 1997 From: jason@linux.aatech.com (Jason Duerstock) Date: Thu, 27 Feb 1997 20:15:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Getting attached... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, Bob Fink LBNL wrote: > Jason, > > Then I would suggest using DIGITAL-CA, NRL or CISCO until more happens in > the the southeast. It seems CIC is the closest to me, so I'm going to try go get hooked up through them. Now that I have my connecting point, according to the web page, the next step is choosing my address. According to the page...: > The address format from RFC 1897 is extracted below for your convenience > in understanding the email example: > > > | 3 | 5 bits | 16 bits | 8 | 24 bits | 8 | 16 bits|48 bits| > +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+ > | | |Autonomous| | IPv4 | | Subnet | Intf. | > |010| 11111 | System |RES| Network |RES| | | > | | | Number | | Address | | Address| ID | > +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+ > > Note that an RFC1897 format address includes the ASN (Autonomous System > Number) of one's provider, not an ASN that belongs to one's own site. > (Though a provider uses its own ASN.) This is would make my address 5F: (01011111 == first 8 bits) 0D: T E9: +- 3561 (for MCI's ASN) 00: (RES == reserved...?) CE: 206. \ 9C: 156. > our IPv4 class C subnet 94: 148. / 00: (RES == reserved...) This gives me the first 8 bytes, but I'm unsure as to what the subnet address and interface ID means...it it safe to assume...: 00: T 01: +- 1 for first address on the subnet and 00: T 00: | 00: | 00: | 00: | 01: +- interface #1 ? And for RIPE purposes, this would be come 5F0D:E900:CE9C:9400/64 ? Assuming this is correct, should I register with RIPE first, or actually try to get the tunnel up and running? Thanks for the help and sorry about all the questions. :) Jason Duerstock jason@linux.aatech.com From pcurran@ticl.co.uk Fri Feb 28 07:20:35 1997 From: pcurran@ticl.co.uk (Peter Curran) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 07:20:35 -0000 Subject: SNMP with v6 capability Message-ID: <199702280706.HAA26294@gate.ticl.co.uk> Hi I am looking for a SNMP manager and agent for UNIX that groks IPv6. Can somebody point me towards a solution. Many thanks Peter Curran TICL From guyd@uunet.pipex.com Fri Feb 28 09:25:51 1997 From: guyd@uunet.pipex.com (Guy Davies) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 09:25:51 +0000 (GMT) Subject: request for a connection In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Tom, UUNET/US isn't yet connected to the 6bone. UUNET/UK is but you may find you get better responses if you connect to another US backbone site. If none will help, then get back in touch with ipv6@uunet.pipex.com and I'll willingly setup a tunnel for you (but your US=>US traffic will cross the Atlantic twice)-: My suggestion would be to go through the backbone sites and traceroute to the IPv4 address of their routers. Pick the one with the fewest hops (giving preference to US sites) Hope this helps. Regards, Guy Guy Davies UUNET ---------- Internet House, 332 Science Park Operational Services Manager Milton Road Cambridge, CB4 4BZ email: guyd@uunet.pipex.com url: http://www.uunet.pipex.com/ tel: +44 (0)1223 250122 #4 fax: +44 (0)1223 250133 On Thu, 27 Feb 1997, Tom Dyas wrote: > I am interested in getting a connection to the 6bone for Rutgers > University. Some minor questions (probably some stupid ones as well): > > 1) Is there anybody close to Central New Jersey (New Brunswick > specifically) that would be willing to provide a tunnel? > > 2) I picked my RFC1897 prefix to be 5F02:BD00:8006:0000::/64 since the > provider ASN (UUNet) is 701. Now, for the IPv4 network part of the > prefix, I used 800600 as the basis since Rutgers has the Class B > 128.6.0.0. But we also have the Class B 165.230.0.0, so should the > prefix reflect that in some way as well? > > (Or I am just being extremly paranoid and it does not matter what I > choose as long as it is consistent within Rutgers?) > > Tom > > > Tom Dyas tdyas@noc.rutgers.edu > Network Operations Group http://www-no.rutgers.edu/~tdyas/ > Rutgers University Computing Services 908-445-5683 > From Jaroslav Martan Fri Feb 28 11:01:04 1997 From: Jaroslav Martan (Jaroslav Martan) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 12:01:04 +0100 (MET) Subject: Looking for connection to 6bone Message-ID: Hi, we have a small experimental ipv6 network and would like to connect to 6bone. Would be anybody interested in setting up a tunnel to us ? Regards Jarda -- ======= ___ === Jaroslav Martan, Network Engineer, ====== / / / ___ ____ _/_ ==== EUnet Communications Services BV ===== /--- / / / / /___/ / ===== Singel 540, 1017 AZ Amsterdam, NL ==== /___ /___/ / / /___ /_ ====== Tel. +31 20 5305333; Fax. +31 20 6224657 === ======= [ 24hr emergency number +31 20 4210865 ] === Connecting Europe since 1982 === http://www.EU.net e-mail: martan@EU.net From RLFink@lbl.gov Fri Feb 28 13:58:40 1997 From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink LBNL) Date: Fri, 28 Feb 1997 05:58:40 -0800 Subject: Looking for connection to 6bone In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Jaroslav, At 3:01 AM -0800 2/28/97, Jaroslav Martan wrote: ... >we have a small experimental ipv6 network and would like to connect to 6bone. >Would be anybody interested in setting up a tunnel to us ? Please try the TELEBIT/DK folk. hha@tbit.dk Failing that, try the JOIN/DE folk. Thanks, Bob