From friedrich@planet.de Fri Dec 4 17:11:53 1998 From: friedrich@planet.de (A. Friedrich) Date: Fri, 04 Dec 1998 18:11:53 +0100 Subject: problems with networking Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19981204181153.0093b100@mail.planet.de> Hi, I have a little problem, hope you can help me. When i try to make a telnet or ftp on my ipv6-host, i get following messages in my syslog-file. " in.telnetd[128]: refused connect from 0.64.6.0" Telnet and ftp chrashes with "segmentation fault". My system is a linux-2.1.131 box (on a pentium), DNS is i.O. , inet-apps-0.34,net-tools-1.47 and telnet.95.10.23.NE . I think is a problem with a libery (function inet_ntoa ?). Thanx Axel _________________________________________________ reality.sys corrupt ! REBOOT UNIVERSE (Y/n)? \ From Francis.Dupont@inria.fr Mon Dec 7 01:36:36 1998 From: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr (Francis Dupont) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 02:36:36 +0100 (MET) Subject: icmpv6 type 140 ? Message-ID: <199812070136.CAA23425@givry.inria.fr> I've just seen some ICMPv6 packets with type 140 (unassigned, last type is 138 for router renumbering) on the Ethernet at the IETF terminal room. What are they ? Francis.Dupont@inria.fr From Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca Mon Dec 7 14:23:22 1998 From: Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca (Marc Blanchet) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 09:23:22 -0500 Subject: ipv6 term room and fetching rfcs using native v6 Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19981207092322.00c6eaf0@mail.viagenie.qc.ca> Hi, the ipv6 network is up since 20h00 yesterday in the terminal room, in both the laptop and the desktop networks. You will have a 3ffe:0b00:c18:[23]/64 prefix. For the fun of it, we've put a mirror of our normos site (rfc-draft-std-ripe-... mirror and database) on ipv6 accessible by http://normos.ipv6.viagenie.qc.ca (only the AAAA record is available for this hostname, so you need a ipv6 capable browser) so you can fetch RFCs and drafts in native ipv6... ;-))) Regards, Marc. ----------------------------------------------------------- Marc Blanchet | Marc.Blanchet@viagenie.qc.ca Viagénie inc. | http://www.viagenie.qc.ca 3107 des hôtels | tél.: 418-656-9254 Ste-Foy, Québec | fax.: 418-656-0183 Canada, G1W 4W5 | radio: VA2-JAZ ------------------------------------------------------------ Internet Engineering Standards/Normes d'ingénierie Internet http://www.normos.org ------------------------------------------------------------ From Francis.Dupont@inria.fr Mon Dec 7 16:18:07 1998 From: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr (Francis Dupont) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 17:18:07 +0100 Subject: icmpv6 type 140 ? In-Reply-To: Your message of Mon, 07 Dec 1998 12:41:21 +0900. <2312.913002081@turmeric.itojun.org> Message-ID: <199812071618.RAA22422@givry.inria.fr> In your previous mail you wrote: I'm sorry if it bothers you... I'm always hoping to use official number for this... => it didn't bother me, it was just curiosity... Francis.Dupont@inria.fr From capriott@gulliver.unian.it Mon Dec 7 23:29:27 1998 From: capriott@gulliver.unian.it (Capriotti Andrea) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 00:29:27 +0100 Subject: INTERNET 2 Information Request Message-ID: <003101be2239$70266fc0$0100005a@granma> Dear Sir or Madam My name is Andrea Capriotti and I am specializing in Telecomunications at the Electronics Engineering University of ANCONA (Italy). I am working for my degree examination concerning INTERNET 2 and I am looking for every information about links and technical materials (e.g. Bandwith, QoS, GigaPops, IPV6, protocols and every kind of mathematical formulas). I have already examinated the Web pages of www.internet2.edu and those connected to it downloading most of the Powerpoint presentations and a lot of documentation but I need more scientifical and mathematical informations. Waiting for news, I thank you in advance for your interesting. Yours Faithfully Andrea Capriotti http://gulliver.unian.it/capriotti capriott@gulliver.unian.it ICQ #246379 From bmanning@ISI.EDU Tue Dec 8 03:38:21 1998 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 19:38:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: INTERNET 2 Information Request In-Reply-To: <003101be2239$70266fc0$0100005a@granma> from "Capriotti Andrea" at Dec 8, 98 00:29:27 am Message-ID: <199812080338.TAA25219@zephyr.isi.edu> I understand that Internet2 has the intention of joining the 6bone. Please contact Dale Finklstein for more details. > > Dear Sir or Madam > > My name is Andrea Capriotti and I am specializing in Telecomunications at > the > Electronics Engineering University of ANCONA (Italy). > I am working for my degree examination concerning INTERNET 2 and I am > looking for every information about links and technical materials (e.g. > Bandwith, QoS, GigaPops, IPV6, protocols and every kind of mathematical > formulas). > I have already examinated the Web pages of www.internet2.edu and those > connected to it downloading most of the Powerpoint presentations and a lot > of documentation but I need more scientifical and mathematical informations. > Waiting for news, I thank you in advance for your interesting. > > Yours Faithfully > Andrea Capriotti > http://gulliver.unian.it/capriotti > capriott@gulliver.unian.it > ICQ #246379 > > > -- --bill From Ramesh Shanmuganathan Tue Dec 8 03:47:04 1998 From: Ramesh Shanmuganathan (Ramesh Shanmuganathan) Date: Mon, 07 Dec 1998 22:47:04 -0500 Subject: INTERNET 2 Information Request Message-ID: <000c01be225d$c38c3040$44efca98@vogmudet> Hi! Andrea, I don't quite understand what you mean by scientific and mathematical formulae. As for Internet2 goes I guess there two schools of thought. One is IP over ATM ( or MPOA) another is POS ( packet over Sonet). So the concepts that govern the backbone necessarily stems from ATM network concepts and that of BISDN and SONET depending on their deployment. Only if you could elucidate as to your specific research area into Internet2, I may be of help. Incidentally I am involved with the Internet2 project at University of Rochester as part of my thesis work on "IP over ATM". Take care. Best regards, Ramesh _________________________________________________________________ Ramesh Shanmuganathan 233D Perkins Green, Perkins Road Rochester NY 14623 Tel: 716-424-8384/8796 E-mail: s.ramesh-rit@ieee.org, ramesh@computer.org Internet: http://www.rit.edu/~rxs6469 -----Original Message----- From: Capriotti Andrea To: 6bone@ISI.EDU <6bone@ISI.EDU> Date: Monday, December 07, 1998 8:41 PM Subject: INTERNET 2 Information Request >Dear Sir or Madam > >My name is Andrea Capriotti and I am specializing in Telecomunications at >the >Electronics Engineering University of ANCONA (Italy). >I am working for my degree examination concerning INTERNET 2 and I am >looking for every information about links and technical materials (e.g. >Bandwith, QoS, GigaPops, IPV6, protocols and every kind of mathematical >formulas). >I have already examinated the Web pages of www.internet2.edu and those >connected to it downloading most of the Powerpoint presentations and a lot >of documentation but I need more scientifical and mathematical informations. >Waiting for news, I thank you in advance for your interesting. > >Yours Faithfully >Andrea Capriotti >http://gulliver.unian.it/capriotti >capriott@gulliver.unian.it >ICQ #246379 > > From richdr@microsoft.com Wed Dec 9 06:01:30 1998 From: richdr@microsoft.com (Richard Draves) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 22:01:30 -0800 Subject: connectivity problem Message-ID: <4D0A23B3F74DD111ACCD00805F31D8100AF81890@RED-MSG-50> I'm having trouble reaching sipper.ipv6.zk3-dec.com from ipv6.research.microsoft.com. Sometimes pings get through, and sometimes I get Destination Unreachable (Address Unreachable) errors from 3ffe:1001:1:f004::1. The strange thing is there seems to be a 10-second periodicity. Five pings will succeed, then 5 pings will fail, and so on. The good thing is that TCP has no problems coping with this and I can access http://sipper.ipv6.zk3-dec.com just fine. I note that the ftp server on sipper does not seem to support the EPSV command. Does anyone have one up that I can test against? Thanks, Rich From slo@falcon.csc.calpoly.edu Wed Dec 9 11:52:48 1998 From: slo@falcon.csc.calpoly.edu (Siu Ming Lo) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 03:52:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Any publicly avaiable ipv6 ftp server on NT4.0 Message-ID: Hi Everyone, Did anyone know where i can find and download some publicly-available ipv6 ftp servers for my computer running Windows NT4.0? Either source code or executable will work. Thanks Siu From rlfink@lbl.gov Wed Dec 9 13:40:44 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 09 Dec 1998 08:40:44 -0500 Subject: 6ren discussion in Paradise A at 12:15 PM (40-45 mins at most) Message-ID: <4.1.19981209083831.01a9de10@cnrmail.lbl.gov> As mentioned in the ngtrans meeting yesterday, I will have a brief 6ren startup discussion at 12:15 PM in Paradise A today, Wed. Current 6boen pTLAs are especially invite to come. Thanks, Bob From capriott@gulliver.unian.it Wed Dec 9 17:07:30 1998 From: capriott@gulliver.unian.it (Andrea Capriotti) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 18:07:30 +0100 (CET) Subject: Any publicly avaiable ipv6 ftp server on NT4.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 9 Dec 1998, Siu Ming Lo wrote: > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 03:52:48 -0800 (PST) > From: Siu Ming Lo > To: 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: Any publicly avaiable ipv6 ftp server on NT4.0 > > > Hi Everyone, > > Did anyone know where i can find and download some publicly-available ipv6 > ftp servers for my computer running Windows NT4.0? Either source code or > executable will work. > > Thanks > > Siu > I am searching for this too.... If I find something I'll comunicate. Regards Andrea Capriotti From jabley@clear.co.nz Wed Dec 9 20:01:03 1998 From: jabley@clear.co.nz (Joe Abley) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 09:01:03 +1300 Subject: 6ren discussion in Paradise A at 12:15 PM (40-45 mins at most) In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981209083831.01a9de10@cnrmail.lbl.gov>; from Bob Fink on Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 08:40:44AM -0500 References: <4.1.19981209083831.01a9de10@cnrmail.lbl.gov> Message-ID: <19981210090103.A6326@clear.co.nz> On Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 08:40:44AM -0500, Bob Fink wrote: > As mentioned in the ngtrans meeting yesterday, I will have a brief 6ren > startup discussion at 12:15 PM in Paradise A today, Wed. Where? Today is Thursday :) From rlfink@lbl.gov Sun Dec 13 00:01:53 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 19:01:53 -0500 Subject: Minutes of NGtrans WG Meeting Orlando IETF Dec 98 Message-ID: <4.1.19981212190102.01fc9d80@cnrmail.lbl.gov> --=====================_464915961==_.ALT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Minutes of NGtrans WG Meeting 8 December 1998 Orlando IETF Chairs: Bob Fink fink@es.net Tony Hain tonyhain@microsoft.com This ngtrans meeting reported by Alain Durand, Bob Fink and Tony Hain Attendance: 170 signed in, estimated at 200 actually present ________________________________________________________________ Administrative information: Discussion ngtrans: ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com Subscribe ngtrans: majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com "subscribe ngtrans" Archive ngtrans: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ngtrans Web site: http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans.html Discussion 6bone: 6bone@isi.edu Subscribe 6bone: majordomo@isi.edu "subscribe 6bone" Archive ngtrans: http://www.ipv6.nas.nasa.gov/6bone/ Web site: http://www.6bone.net ___ The chairs announced there will be a joint ngtrans/ipng interim meeting in the San Francisco area in early February for future planning of IETF IPv6 work. Further revisions to the ngtrans charter will await these discussions and due process in the WG. An announcement will be made to all the mail lists as soon as possible as to time and place. Bob Gilligan has resigned as a co-chair of ngtrans due to other commitments. The continuing co-chairs would like to thank Bob for all his past IPv6 work, for the IPng WG and NGtrans WG. Newcomers should be aware that Bob helped craft IPv6's excellent Transition Mechanisms concepts and architecture. ___ Erik Nordmark from Sun concluded discussion on the I-D for replacement of RFC 1933 (Transition Mechanisms) and will proceed with a last call on this work. Items that will be included in the -01 to -02 version of the I-D are: Will add clarification that configured tunnels can be unidirectional or bidirectional. Will add description of bidirectional virtual links as another type of tunnel, and that nodes MUST respond to NUD probes on such links and SHOULD send NUD probes. Will add reference to [6over4] work. Will clarify that IPv4-compatible addresses are assigned exclusively to nodes that support automatic tunnels. Will add text about formation of link-local addresses and use of Neighbor Discovery (ND not used on unidirectional links.) Will add restriction that decapsulated packets not be forwarded unless the source address is acceptable to the decapsulating router. ___ Announced conclusion of last call for SIIT, which will now be forwarded for IESG processing as Experimental RFC. ___ Discussed WG last call for NAT-PT Experimental RFC forwarding with agreement that the author would cleanup references to, and duplication of, SIIT work. Then another last call will be done. ___ Announced conclusion of last call for 6bone Routing Practices, which will now be forwarded for IESG processing as Informational RFC. ___ Kazu Yamamoto from the Internet Initiative Japan gave a presentation on "Categorizing Translators Between IPv4 and IPv6" (co-author is Munechika Simikawa from Hitachi). This work has value to the transition activity as an Informational RFC, so this will be explored with the authors. ___ Kazuaki Tsuchiya from Hitachi gave a presentation on "Dual Stack Hosts Using the Bump-in-the-Stack Technique" (co-authors are Hidemitsu Higuchi and Yoshifumi Atarashi, also from Hitachi). This work allows IPv6 access to IPv4 applications through a translator installed in the target host. There was some question as to whether this work could progress as is, and whether it should be Informational or Experimental. This will be pursued on the mailing list by the author. The presentation is available at ___ Hiroshi Kitamura from NEC and Shinji Kobayashi from Fujitsu jointly presented their work on "SOCKS5 based Transition Technology" which has been published as and as (co-Author Akira Jinzaki from Fujitsu). This presentation is available at . The three authors will now decide how to jointly prepare an I-D for processing either as Informational or Experimental RFC. ___ Hossam Afifi presented "A Dynamic Tunneling Interface" (co-author Laurent Toutain from ENST-Bretagne). The motivation for the work was to make the smallest number of modifications to applications and components to communicate between IPv4 and IPv6 applications. IPv4 packets from the application are intercepted in a dynamic tunnel interface (dti) library to look in DNS to see if there is an IPv6 destination address, and a dynamic v4 in v6 tunnel is set up. The authors will submit their I-D as an ngtrans draft and circulate it on the mail list for comment. This work would presumably be eventually processed as an Experimental RFC. ___ Brian Carpenter from IBM presented his ideas for "A '624' TLA for Automatic Tunneling". The concept being that a special TLA would be allocated to indicate that the NLA 32-bit field below it contained the IPv4 address for an IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel endpoint to be used in communicating with the host so advertising that IPv6 address. Presumably this would be done by hosts with no direct IPv6 connectivity between them. Thus if a TLA=624 was discovered by DNS lookup, IPv6 packets could be automatically encapsulated in IPv4 protocol 41 tunnels to the IPv4 address in the NLA portion of the TLA=624 address. It is believed that there is no impact to IPv6 routing tables. When IPv4 goes away then these prefixes would also. One open issue identified is that you could not use these addresses for multicast. Brian will formulate this into an I-D and circulate it. ___ Laurent Toutain presented his work on "Manipulating the 6bone Registry Objects Through a Web Interface", work which will integrated with David Kessens' IPv6 registry work. This effort should make the process of IPv6 sites managing and updating their objects much easier. This work is very helpful to all! ___ Bob Hinden discussed the Sub-TLA block allocation I-D (draft-ietf-ipngwg-iana-tla-00.txt) that was written jointly by the ngtrans and ipng WG chairs to advise the IANA on initial Sub-TLA allocations to APNIC, ARIN and RIPE-NCC. It is hoped that this I-D will allow the initial Sub-TLA registry assignment process to continue to successful conclusion in the first quarter of 1999. ___ David Kessens gave a brief update of the 6bone. There are now 51 6bone backbone sites and a total of 332 6bone sites in 39 countries. The registry is seeing 1700 queries and 8 updates a day. David announced that he has moved to Quest, and that Quest has agreed to have him move the 6bone registry from ISI to Quest. Thanks as always to David, and now Quest, for his fine efforts on IPv6 registries. ___ Ivano Guardini from CSELT gave an update of 6bone backbone routing activity and analysis by CSELT. Since the last IETF he has been collecting BGP4+ routing information provided by ASpath-tree. The BGP4+ routing table of their border router is downloaded and analyzed every 5 mins. Then 6bone routing behavior is measured in terms of number of advertised prefixes, overall route availability and overall route unstability. These studies are showing increasing pTLA route availability, and an unstability of 2.5%. These studies are from CSELT's perspective, and Ivano would like others to join in analyzing this data from their sites perspective. Please contact him at ivano.guardini@cselt.it or Paolo Fasano at paolo.fasano@cselt.it. The reports and other information is available through . Thanks also to Ivano for his fine efforts on helping us understand the stability of routing on the 6bone. ___ Rob Rockell presented his views on the need to tighten 6bone backbone routing policing, and for everyone to follow the 6bone Routing Practices I-D rules. He discussed why good 6bone routing policy is needed for proper IPv6 testing, to figure out multi-homing problems, and downstream routing policy concerns. Policy is needed between pTLAs as addresses aren't portable, and routing is supposed to be simple and aggregated. He strongly encouraged 6bone pTLA peers to accept only top-level aggregates (i.e., /24s) and reject anything more specific. Only accept more than your neighboring peer pTLA if agreed upon for providing transit for other pTLAs. Also, pTLAs should not pass on things that cause trouble, don't waste the BGP and line sending unaggregated routes. Therefore, only send your aggregates and whatever other pTLAs you want to give transit for. Do not allow more specific routes. Only allow the space that you have delegated (to NLAs below you) to be announced up through you into your AS. Allowing other TLA space through your routing domain disables the good value of the iPv6 addressing hierarchy. ___ Bob Fink from ESnet presented the new 6REN production IPv6 Research and Education Networks (RENs) initiative. The 6REN is not a network like the 6bone, rather a collaborative effort, sponsored and established by ESnet, to move RENs to production IPv6 service as soon as possible to allow momentum to be maintained in the release of IPv6 in production systems and routers, and to facilitate getting applications operational over IPv6. The 6REN effort started in October with production native IPv6 over ATM peerings between ESnet, vBNS, CAIRN and CA*net2. As soon as the regional address registries can allocate Sub-TLAs to these networks (which they have requested), they will renumber out of 6bone space. The 6ren is a no cost, open to all, initiative, including for-profit production IPv6 networks. It is not an IETF activity, though it will present information as appropriate to the ngtrans WG to assist in transition activities. -end --=====================_464915961==_.ALT Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Minutes of NGtrans WG Meeting
8 December 1998
Orlando IETF

Chairs: Bob Fink fink@es.net
Tony Hain tonyhain@microsoft.com

This ngtrans meeting reported by Alain Durand, Bob Fink and Tony Hain

Attendance: 170 signed in, estimated at 200 actually present
________________________________________________________________
Administrative information:

Discussion ngtrans:  ngtrans@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Subscribe ngtrans:   majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com "subscribe ngtrans"
Archive ngtrans:     ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ngtrans
Web site:            http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans.html

Discussion 6bone:    6bone@isi.edu
Subscribe 6bone:     majordomo@isi.edu "subscribe 6bone"
Archive ngtrans:     http://www.ipv6.nas.nasa.gov/6bone/
Web site:            http://www.6bone.net


___

The chairs announced there will be a joint ngtrans/ipng interim meeting in the San Francisco area in early February for future planning of IETF IPv6 work. Further revisions to the ngtrans charter will await these discussions and due process in the WG. An announcement will be made to all the mail lists as soon as possible as to time and place.

Bob Gilligan has resigned as a co-chair of ngtrans due to other commitments. The continuing co-chairs would like to thank Bob for all his past IPv6 work, for the IPng WG and NGtrans WG. Newcomers should be aware that Bob helped craft IPv6's excellent Transition Mechanisms concepts and architecture.

___

Erik Nordmark from Sun concluded discussion on the I-D for replacement of RFC 1933 (Transition Mechanisms) and will proceed with a last call on this work. Items that will be included in the -01 to -02 version of the I-D are:

Will add clarification that configured tunnels can be unidirectional or bidirectional.

Will add description of bidirectional virtual links as another type of tunnel, and that nodes MUST respond to NUD probes on such links and SHOULD send NUD probes.

Will add reference to [6over4] work.

Will clarify that IPv4-compatible addresses are assigned exclusively to nodes that support automatic tunnels.

Will add text about formation of link-local addresses and use of Neighbor Discovery (ND not used on unidirectional links.)

Will add restriction that decapsulated packets not be forwarded unless the source address is acceptable to the decapsulating router.

___

Announced conclusion of last call for SIIT, which will now be forwarded for IESG processing as Experimental RFC.

___

Discussed WG last call for NAT-PT Experimental RFC forwarding with agreement that the author would cleanup references to, and duplication of, SIIT work. Then another last call will be done.

___

Announced conclusion of last call for 6bone Routing Practices, which will now be forwarded for IESG processing as Informational RFC.

___

Kazu Yamamoto from the Internet Initiative Japan gave a presentation on "Categorizing Translators Between IPv4 and IPv6" <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ngtrans-translator-00.txt> (co-author is Munechika Simikawa from Hitachi). This work has value to the transition activity as an Informational RFC, so this will be explored with the authors.

___

Kazuaki Tsuchiya from Hitachi gave a presentation on "Dual Stack Hosts Using the Bump-in-the-Stack Technique" <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ngtrans-dual-stack-hosts-00.txt> (co-authors are Hidemitsu Higuchi and Yoshifumi Atarashi, also from Hitachi). This work allows IPv6 access to IPv4 applications through a translator installed in the target host. There was some question as to whether this work could progress as is, and whether it should be Informational or Experimental. This will be pursued on the mailing list by the author. The presentation is available at <http://www.hitachi.co.jp/Prod/comp/network/pexv6-e.htm>

___

Hiroshi Kitamura from NEC and Shinji Kobayashi from Fujitsu jointly presented their work on "SOCKS5 based Transition Technology" which has been published as <draft-kitamura-socks-ipv6-trans-arch-00.txt> and as
<draft-jinzaki-socks64-00.txt> (co-Author Akira Jinzaki from Fujitsu). This presentation is available at <http://www.v6.wide.ad.jp/Presentations/ietf43-ngtrans-socks/>. The three authors will now decide how to jointly prepare an I-D for processing either as Informational or Experimental RFC.

___

Hossam Afifi presented "A Dynamic Tunneling Interface" <ftp://ftp.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr/pub/network/draft-toutain-dti-00.txt> (co-author Laurent Toutain from ENST-Bretagne). The motivation for the work was to make the smallest number of modifications to applications and components to communicate between IPv4 and IPv6 applications. IPv4 packets from the application are intercepted in a dynamic tunnel interface (dti) library to look in DNS to see if there is an IPv6 destination address, and a dynamic v4 in v6 tunnel is set up. The authors will submit their I-D as an ngtrans draft and circulate it on the mail list for comment. This work would presumably be eventually processed as an Experimental RFC.

___

Brian Carpenter from IBM presented his ideas for "A '624' TLA for Automatic Tunneling". The concept being that a special TLA would be allocated to indicate that the NLA 32-bit field below it contained the IPv4 address for an IPv6 over IPv4 tunnel endpoint to be used in communicating with the host so advertising that IPv6 address.

Presumably this would be done by hosts with no direct IPv6 connectivity between them. Thus if a TLA=624 was discovered by DNS lookup, IPv6 packets could be automatically encapsulated in IPv4 protocol 41 tunnels to the IPv4 address in the NLA portion of the TLA=624 address.

It is believed that there is no impact to IPv6 routing tables. When IPv4 goes away then these prefixes would also. One open issue identified is that you could not use these addresses for multicast.

Brian will formulate this into an I-D and circulate it.

___

Laurent Toutain presented his work on "Manipulating the 6bone Registry Objects Through a Web Interface", work which will integrated with David Kessens' IPv6 registry work. This effort should make the process of IPv6 sites managing and updating their objects much easier. This work is very helpful to all!

___

Bob Hinden discussed the Sub-TLA block allocation I-D (draft-ietf-ipngwg-iana-tla-00.txt) that was written jointly by the ngtrans and ipng WG chairs to advise the IANA on initial Sub-TLA allocations to APNIC, ARIN and RIPE-NCC. It is hoped that this I-D will allow the initial Sub-TLA registry assignment process to continue to successful conclusion in the first quarter of 1999.

___

David Kessens gave a brief update of the 6bone.  There are now 51 6bone backbone sites and a total of 332 6bone sites in 39 countries. The registry is seeing 1700 queries and 8 updates a day. David announced that he has moved to Quest, and that Quest has agreed to have him move the 6bone registry from ISI to Quest. Thanks as always to David, and now Quest, for his fine efforts on IPv6 registries.

___

Ivano Guardini from CSELT gave an update of 6bone backbone routing activity and analysis by CSELT. Since the last IETF he has been collecting BGP4+ routing information provided by ASpath-tree. The BGP4+ routing table of their border router is downloaded and analyzed every 5 mins. Then 6bone routing behavior is measured in terms of number of advertised prefixes, overall route availability and overall route unstability.

These studies are showing increasing pTLA route availability, and an unstability of 2.5%. These studies are from CSELT's perspective, and Ivano would like others to join in analyzing this data from their sites perspective. Please contact him at ivano.guardini@cselt.it or Paolo Fasano at paolo.fasano@cselt.it.

The reports and other information is available through <http://carmen.cselt.it/ipv6/index.html>.

Thanks also to Ivano for his fine efforts on helping us understand the stability of routing on the 6bone.
___

Rob Rockell presented his views on the need to tighten 6bone backbone routing policing, and for everyone to follow the 6bone Routing Practices I-D rules.

He discussed why good 6bone routing policy is needed for proper IPv6 testing, to figure out multi-homing problems, and downstream routing policy concerns.

Policy is needed between pTLAs as addresses aren't portable, and routing is supposed to be simple and aggregated.

He strongly encouraged 6bone pTLA peers to accept only top-level aggregates (i.e., /24s) and reject anything more specific. Only accept more than your neighboring peer pTLA if agreed upon for providing transit for other pTLAs.

Also, pTLAs should not pass on things that cause trouble, don't waste the BGP and line sending unaggregated routes.  Therefore, only send your aggregates and whatever other pTLAs you want to give transit for. 

Do not allow more specific routes.

Only allow the space that you have delegated (to NLAs below you) to be announced up through you into your AS.

Allowing other TLA space through your routing domain disables the good value of the iPv6 addressing hierarchy.

___

Bob Fink from ESnet presented the new 6REN production IPv6 Research and Education Networks (RENs) initiative. The 6REN is not a network like the 6bone, rather a collaborative effort, sponsored and established by ESnet, to move RENs to production IPv6 service as soon as possible to allow momentum to be maintained in the release of IPv6 in production systems and routers, and to facilitate getting applications operational over IPv6.

The 6REN effort started in October with production native IPv6 over ATM peerings between ESnet, vBNS, CAIRN and CA*net2. As soon as the regional address registries can allocate Sub-TLAs to these networks (which they have requested), they will renumber out of 6bone space.

The 6ren is a no cost, open to all, initiative, including for-profit production IPv6 networks. It is not an IETF activity, though it will present information as appropriate to the ngtrans WG to assist in transition activities.

-end

--=====================_464915961==_.ALT-- From deering@cisco.com Wed Dec 16 08:17:27 1998 From: deering@cisco.com (Steve Deering) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 00:17:27 -0800 Subject: interim meeting planning In-Reply-To: <199812151754.SAA04217@brahma.imag.fr> Message-ID: As mentioned in the ipngwg and ngtrans meetings in Orlando last week, the chairs of the two working groups propose to hold a two-day joint interim meeting in the first week of February to discuss the next steps in IPv6 standardization, implementation, transition, and deployment. We propose also to allocate a third day for non-working-group business, such as coordination of the 6bone, 6ren, and other IPv6-related initiatives. A more concrete agenda is in preparation, but of immediate concern is deciding where to meet. We have narrowed it down to two choices: (1) the San Francisco Bay Area (2) Grenoble, France The meeting dates will be February 2-4. We would like to hear as soon as possible (like, within the next 24 hours) from those of you who would like to attend the meeting but will be able to attend in only one of those two places. Specifically: - If you can attend in either place, do not reply. - If you cannot attend in either place, do not reply, - If you can attend in only one of those two places, please reply as soon as possible to Bob, Bob, Tony, and me (our addresses are in the Cc: line, above; please do NOT reply to the three mailing lists in the To: line!), and tell us in which place you can attend. Thanks, Steve From Spencer.Giacalone@digital.com Wed Dec 16 15:52:45 1998 From: Spencer.Giacalone@digital.com (Spencer Giacalone) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:52:45 -0500 Subject: V6 addresses Message-ID: <40AD9449F458D111AE010000F81E0BEE01642C5A@nyoexc1.nyo.dec.com> Guys, I finally have my laptop tunnel connection up. I can ping my router using v6, However I can't ping to the 6bone. So the troubleshooting starts now. Can someone give me a known good v6 address, please. Thanks, Spence From rlfink@lbl.gov Wed Dec 16 16:57:42 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:57:42 -0500 Subject: pTLA request from RedIRIS In-Reply-To: <981215173715.ZM4214@chico.rediris.es> Message-ID: <4.1.19981216115343.01abf350@cnrmail.lbl.gov> 6bone folk, The RedIRIS folk in Spain have requested pTLA status (see below). I would like to have comments pro and con on this, to me or the mailer. I will close the discussion for a final decision on 28 Feb 98. Thanks, Bob ======== At 05:37 PM 12/15/98 +0100, Antonio Marquez. RedIRIS wrote: > >Dear Bob, > > >I am responsible for the RedIRIS (who manages the spanish research >network) ipv6 project. RedIRIS would like to apply for a ptla assignment. > >RedIRIS is in charge of managing the spanish research community >network. We've been working with ipv6 since april 1997, with the goal of >establishing an appropiate transition scheme when the time comes, and >to assess the benefits for the network. > > >1. must have experience with ipv6 in the 6bone, at least as a leaf >site, and preferably as an NLA transit under a pTLA. > >we are operating a 6bone node at RedIRIS's management center, and have >established tunnels: first, RIPng with surfnet/nl and now bgp4+ routing peer >with surfnet/nl and RIPng routing with an spanish university. We have been >experimenting with 6bone connectivity: > >NLA network 5F02:FE00::/32 under SURFNET (6bone NL-pTLA) first and >3FFE:0608:0::/48 under SURFNET (6bone NL-pTLA) since november 1997. > >We have assigned some address prefix for sites below our NLA and are now >providing transit service for 6bone connectivity. > > >2. must have the ability and intent to provide "production-like" 6bone >backbone service to provide a robust and operationally reliable 6bone >backbone. > >we currently run several services on an ipv6 node at RedIRIS's management >center and have several agreements to connect several institutions who >have an interest in ipv6, namely several spanish universities. > > >3. must have a potential "user community" that would be served by >becoming a pTLA, e.g., the requester is a major player in a region, >country or focus of interest. > >RedIRIS manages the spanish national research comunnity network, >connecting the majority of the universities in the country, as well as >many research organizations. > > >4. must commit to abide by whatever the 6bone backbone operational >rules and policies are (currently there are no formal ones, but the >alain duran draft is a start in trying to define some). > >we hereby state that will abide to the 6bone operational rules and >policies. > > >Now, we are updating 6bone database objects. I hope that after studying these >responses, you will assign a pTLA to us. > > >Thank you in advance. > > >Antonio Marquez. > >-- > > __________________ __ >__________________________ > /_/ > Antonio Marquez __ __ Email: antonio.marquez@rediris.es > RedIRIS/CSIC /_/ RedIRIS /_/ Tel: + 34 91 5855150 > Serrano,142 __ Fax: + 34 91 5855146 > 28006 Madrid /_/ > SPAIN Centro de Gestion de RED de REDIRIS > > ________________ Spanish Academic & Research Network _______________________ From Spencer.Giacalone@digital.com Wed Dec 16 19:23:33 1998 From: Spencer.Giacalone@digital.com (Spencer Giacalone) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 14:23:33 -0500 Subject: problem isolated Message-ID: <40AD9449F458D111AE010000F81E0BEE01642C69@nyoexc1.nyo.dec.com> Guys, Thanks for the responces. Working within DEC, the problem has been traced to firewalls. Spence From ipv6@linux.tc Thu Dec 17 05:40:38 1998 From: ipv6@linux.tc (IPv6 Administrator) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 00:40:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: Can somebody bring me up to speed? Message-ID: I have been gone for the last 2-3 months, could somebody please inform me of any new developments with 6bone. Thank you, John From hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg Thu Dec 17 15:44:39 1998 From: hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg (Hossam El-Ashkar) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:44:39 +0200 (EET) Subject: Can somebody bring me up to speed? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Please same here!!! On Thu, 17 Dec 1998, IPv6 Administrator wrote: > I have been gone for the last 2-3 months, could somebody please inform me > of any new developments with 6bone. > > Thank you, > John > > -------------------------------------------------------------- Hossam El-Ashkar IDSC/RITSEC - Communication Dept. hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg From firefury@sucs.swan.ac.uk Thu Dec 17 20:44:06 1998 From: firefury@sucs.swan.ac.uk (Steve Hill) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:44:06 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Dial-Up Message-ID: I'm currently in the process of setting up IPv6 for use on my LAN (not connected to the 6Bone). I'm thinking about possibly connecting to the 6Bone once I have the basics figured out, but my only internet access where I could really use IPv6 is via my Demon Internet account. This is a static-IP dial-up account. Would I still be able to put my LAN on the 6bone or would it be too complex, having to open and close IPv6-on-IPv4 tunnels each time I connect and disconnect? I assume the fact that my account is static-IP will make things a little easier.. - Steve From map@stacken.kth.se Fri Dec 18 01:37:12 1998 From: map@stacken.kth.se (Magnus Ahltorp) Date: 18 Dec 1998 02:37:12 +0100 Subject: Dial-Up In-Reply-To: Steve Hill's message of Thu, 17 Dec 1998 20:44:06 +0000 (GMT) References: Message-ID: > This is a static-IP dial-up account. Would I still be able to put > my LAN on the 6bone or would it be too complex, having to open and > close IPv6-on-IPv4 tunnels each time I connect and disconnect? I > assume the fact that my account is static-IP will make things a > little easier.. Your assumption is correct. In your case, nothing is really different from having a normal 6bone connection. If you do normal static routing with your peer, there is nothing called "a connection" between your machine and your 6bone connection point. The IPv6 packets are just prepended with an IPv4 header, and along they go. So, your connection procedure should be the same as a "normal" 6bone leaf site. Magnus Ahltorp Stacken Computer Club (STACKEN) Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden From Alain.Durand@imag.fr Fri Dec 18 14:52:44 1998 From: Alain.Durand@imag.fr (Alain Durand) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 15:52:44 +0100 Subject: Interim Meeting, travel direction Message-ID: <199812181453.PAA01231@imag.imag.fr> I'm very pleased to host the interim meeting in Grenoble. Here are some travel directions: Airports: - Grenoble Saint Geoir. Very little traffic on it. Mostly 4 flights a day for Paris-Orly (2 in the morning, 2 in the evening) and return from Paris-Orly. Beware: most international flight arrives at PARIS-Charles-de-Gaule (CDG) (Roissy) which is very far away from Orly. A shuttle bus to Grenoble-downtown waits passenger at each flight. You can also rent a car at the airport. Gaz is expensive in france. Taxy is very expensive on long distance. It's about 40 min drive to Grenoble. Just take the Highway to Grenoble. - Lyon-Satolas It's an international airport, many flights arrives there. You can also arrives there in a flight connected from Paris-CDG (Air-France, Delta,...) or Zurich (Swissair). There is a shuttle service direct to Grenoble every hour. You can also rent a car at the airport. It's an hour drive to grenoble. Just take the Highway to Grenoble. Note: if you depart from the same airport you arrived, ask for a round-trip shuttle ticket, it's much cheaper (190F instead of 2 x 130F for Lyon's airport) - Geneva It's about 2 hours drive from Grenoble. It might make some sense if you intend to rent a car. Trains: It's usually the best way to come to Grenoble from Paris. It takes 3h only, as the train (TGV) drives 300kph, a little less than 200mph. The TGV leaves from PARIS-Gare-de-Lyon and is direct, non stop to Grenoble. Some of them are direct from Paris-CDG See http://www.sncf.fr for details (they have an english version) Hotels: Here is a list of hotels downtown Grenoble: · hotel des Alpes - 45 avenue Félix Viallet +33 4 76 87 00 71 12 rooms reserved. 270F with breakfast. Specify IETF. · hotel Bastille - 25 avenue Félix Viallet +33 4 76 43 10 27 20 rooms reserved 247F with breakfast fax: +33 476 87 52 69. Specify IETF · hotel Bristol - 11 avenue Félix Viallet +33 4 76 46 11 18 - room: 175 F to 245 F (Breakfast 25 F) · hotel de l'Institut - 10 rue Barbillon +33 4 76 46 36 44 - room 215 F to 240 F (Breakfast 25 F) · hotel Touring hotel - 26 avenue Alsace Lorraine +33 4 76 46 24 32 - room 190 F to 210 F (Breakfast 25 F) The standard of those hotels is somehow less than the one we usually have for IETF meetings, but they are OK. All those hotels are less than 5 min walk from the train station. Airport shuttle arrives at the bus station wich is located next to the train station. Restaurants: Many!!! The best ones are in the pedestrian streets, 5 to 10 min walk from the hotels. Menus are from 60F to 160F+. Transportation: Downtown Grenoble, just walk. To go to the university Campus, take the Tramway B direction University. it's about 15 min ride. Tram fare is 7F50 per ticket. You might buy 10 tickets for about 50F. You might want to take a taxi, it will be a 10 min ride for about 50F Meeting Room: It will be at IMAG, maison Jean Kuntzmann. It's 1 min walk from the tram terminus. See map http://www.imag.fr/Multimedia/logos/Domaine.gif Some pictures: http://www.imag.fr/Multimedia/jeudis/mjk.html Information about IMAG: http://www.imag.fr Terminal Room: We will install some PCs and ether links for laptops. The format of printers is A4, not letter. Lunches: We will organise a catering service. We will have to charge some fees for that, more information later. Misc: Power is 220V is france, 50 Hz. Plugs are round. You can find adapters easily in the US (Radio Shack), it's more difficult to get in france. Inscription & Hotel reservation: Contact ietf@imag.fr for inscriptions. Due to security reasons, the meeting room is limited to 100 persons. I will do the reservation in the hotels for you if you desire. Send exact arrival and departure dates to ietf@imag.fr. Other: Contact ietf@imag.fr You might find some information on http://www.Yahoo.fr or http://www.nomade.fr or http://www.pageswoom.tm.fr - Alain. From ctekwani@cup.hp.com Fri Dec 18 17:11:25 1998 From: ctekwani@cup.hp.com (Chandra Tekwani) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 09:11:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: IPv6 Developer's Kit for HP-UX 11.0 available Message-ID: <199812181711.JAA17680@hpindtug.cup.hp.com> Hewlett-Packard announces the availability of IPv6 Developer's Kit for HP-UX Hewlett-Packard has released the IPv6 Developer's Kit Version 1.0 for experimentation, evaluation and development of applications. The IPv6 Developer's Kit Version 1.0 is available from "http://www.software.hp.com" under "Internet & Security". IPv6 Developer's Kit Version 1.0 runs on 32-bit, HP-UX 11.00 systems. You can send any questions/queries about IPv6 Developer's Kit for HP-UX to hpux-ipv6@cup.hp.com. Chandra Tekwani HP-UX IPv6 Team From dewell@woods.net Fri Dec 18 23:16:08 1998 From: dewell@woods.net (dewell@woods.net) Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 14:16:08 -0900 (AKST) Subject: new/old connection please Message-ID: <13946.57407.975927.94080@snowy.woods.net> Hello everyone, We were connected some time ago, but due to "vendor complications" as well as other problems, we haven't had any 6bone connectivity for at least 6-8 months. And, well, I'd like to reconnect. Our original v6 provider seems pretty busy, or dropped off the planet (NWNET), in any case I haven't heard anything from them in a while. My next plan was to ask here to see if there is someone else with more time to set up a new connection. Our previous connection was back with the previous address prefix, so we'd need to renumber anyway. I intend to provide transit to some other entities in Alaska who aren't connected to the University (which is to say most of them) and who want v6 connectivity. Are there any more news/rumors from Cisco? We're connected (once removed) to UUnet, AGIS, Sprint and IXC in Seattle. Well, the Sprint is through AT&T Alascom, so there is an extra entity there. Thanks! _______________________________________________________________________ |Aaron Dewell ===> dewell@woods.net | |aka local guru ===> dewell@greatland.net | |http://www.woods.net/~dewell http://www.woods.net/ | |PGP keyid 0x0D12A6B9 available from http://keys.pgp.com/ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sara@puck.nether.net Sat Dec 19 10:04:07 1998 From: sara@puck.nether.net (sara ruhmann) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 05:04:07 -0500 Subject: new/old connection please In-Reply-To: <13946.57407.975927.94080@snowy.woods.net>; from dewell@woods.net on Fri, Dec 18, 1998 at 02:16:08PM -0900 References: <13946.57407.975927.94080@snowy.woods.net> Message-ID: <19981219050407.B11888@puck.nether.net> NWNet is still here. We're now part of Verio. Our 6bone expert is now working for the Verio backbone team, so I'm slowly taking over support of our node. I would be happy to straiten out your 6bone connectivity through NWNet. Drop me a note at sara@nw.verio.net. -sara On Fri, Dec 18, 1998 at 02:16:08PM -0900, dewell@woods.net wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > We were connected some time ago, but due to "vendor > complications" as well as other problems, we haven't had any > 6bone connectivity for at least 6-8 months. And, well, I'd like > to reconnect. Our original v6 provider seems pretty busy, or > dropped off the planet (NWNET), in any case I haven't heard > anything from them in a while. My next plan was to ask here to > see if there is someone else with more time to set up a new > connection. > > Our previous connection was back with the previous address > prefix, so we'd need to renumber anyway. > > I intend to provide transit to some other entities in Alaska who > aren't connected to the University (which is to say most of > them) and who want v6 connectivity. > > Are there any more news/rumors from Cisco? > > We're connected (once removed) to UUnet, AGIS, Sprint and IXC in > Seattle. Well, the Sprint is through AT&T Alascom, so there is > an extra entity there. > > Thanks! > > _______________________________________________________________________ > |Aaron Dewell ===> dewell@woods.net | > |aka local guru ===> dewell@greatland.net | > |http://www.woods.net/~dewell http://www.woods.net/ | > |PGP keyid 0x0D12A6B9 available from http://keys.pgp.com/ | > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From firefury@sucs.swan.ac.uk Sat Dec 19 10:06:37 1998 From: firefury@sucs.swan.ac.uk (Steve Hill) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 10:06:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: glibc Message-ID: What version of glibc should I be using for IPv6 on linux? I downloaded v2.0.95, but I can't get the thing to compile (the assembler keels over with "if not a 386 instruction" or something similar). - Steve From death@hawaii.rr.com Sat Dec 19 10:15:04 1998 From: death@hawaii.rr.com (Death) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 00:15:04 -1000 Subject: Cable Modem Message-ID: <367B7CA7.B9A8B415@hawaii.rr.com> I have a cable modem.... and would like to connect to the 6bone... unfortunately every few months my IP address will change.... this would probably not be possible? if it is please let me know =] From hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg Sat Dec 19 15:57:43 1998 From: hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg (Hossam El-Ashkar) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 17:57:43 +0200 (EET) Subject: Back Message-ID: Hello everybody, I have been away from this mailing list for about 3 months. I have noticed that it is now far less active than it was. Is the interest in IPv6 dying or what? I am now responsible for making an ipv6 node here in Egypt, and i need a tunnel to the 6bone. I had a tunnel with 3com before, but it seems that they have stopped their ipv6 activities. Can anyone provide me with a tunnel. I need a breifing on the 6bone state now, where can i find that?? Does the web site has anything that can help? Thanx!! -------------------------------------------------------------- Hossam El-Ashkar IDSC/RITSEC - Communication Dept. hoashkar@idsc1.gov.eg From rlfink@lbl.gov Sat Dec 19 19:07:49 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 14:07:49 -0500 Subject: Back In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.1.19981219135800.01f1b4d0@cnrmail.lbl.gov> Hossam, At 05:57 PM 12/19/98 +0200, Hossam El-Ashkar wrote: >Hello everybody, > I have been away from this mailing list for about 3 months. I have >noticed that it is now far less active than it was. Is the interest in >IPv6 dying or what? Not at all. If anything the pace is picking up, for IPv6. On the other hand, the 6bone isn't all that active as it is mostly a testbed network, not a production network, so many feel they are up and running on current versions of IPv6 that aren't yet in production. This is the reason that I've initiated the 6ren initiative, which I will soon announce on this list. You can look at for some first very high level info about, but most info is in progress as we speak. The good news is that the enthusiam for getting into production is high, which will help us make Internet (IPv4) applications work over IPv6 and get vendors to move their beta code into production versions. > I am now responsible for making an ipv6 node here in Egypt, and i >need a tunnel to the 6bone. I had a tunnel with 3com before, but it seems >that they have stopped their ipv6 activities. Can anyone provide me with a >tunnel. You need to do some traceroutes to get a first cut idea of where your IPv4 paths might take you regarding various pTLA sites, i.e., it is best if you can avoid tunneling all around the world when another path would be much shorter and more reliable. Once you settle on a candidate pTLA, then use their registry data to contact them to see if they will host you. > I need a breifing on the 6bone state now, where can i find that?? >Does the web site has anything that can help? Well, the 6bone web site does tell you how to join, and points to the Lancaster site to see size, topology, etc. At the moment we are 39 countries, 320 sites and 51 backbone pTLAs. If you are looking for something specific, please let me know. Thanks, Bob From Paolo.DUrso@CSELT.IT Mon Dec 21 08:42:14 1998 From: Paolo.DUrso@CSELT.IT (Paolo D'Urso) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 09:42:14 +0100 (MET) Subject: glibc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Steve Hill wrote: > What version of glibc should I be using for IPv6 on linux? I downloaded > v2.0.95, but I can't get the thing to compile (the assembler keels over > with "if not a 386 instruction" or something similar). You need glibc-2.1 but it is still beta. Greetengs Paolo ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Paolo D'Urso e-mail : Paolo.DUrso@CSELT.IT voice (work) : +39 11 228 7745 voice (home) : +39 11 3853647 address (home) : via Sarioletto 3, I-25036 Palazzolo sull'Oglio (BS) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- From jochen@scram.de Mon Dec 21 13:41:56 1998 From: jochen@scram.de (Jochen Friedrich) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:41:56 +0100 (CET) Subject: glibc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Paolo, On Mon, 21 Dec 1998, Paolo D'Urso wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Steve Hill wrote: > > What version of glibc should I be using for IPv6 on linux? I downloaded > > v2.0.95, but I can't get the thing to compile (the assembler keels over > > with "if not a 386 instruction" or something similar). > > You need glibc-2.1 but it is still beta. v2.0.95 == glibc-2.1 I'm currenlty using 2.0.99. Please check the README file very carefully. You really have to use the versions of make, binutils and gcc mentioned, or the compile will fail in one or the other way. Cheers, Jochen From rzm@icm.edu.pl Mon Dec 21 13:48:36 1998 From: rzm@icm.edu.pl (Rafal Maszkowski) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:48:36 +0100 Subject: glibc In-Reply-To: ; from Paolo D'Urso on Mon, Dec 21, 1998 at 09:42:14AM +0100 References: Message-ID: <19981221144836.G21413@icm.edu.pl> On Mon, Dec 21, 1998 at 09:42:14AM +0100, Paolo D'Urso wrote: > On Sat, 19 Dec 1998, Steve Hill wrote: > > What version of glibc should I be using for IPv6 on linux? I downloaded > > v2.0.95, but I can't get the thing to compile (the assembler keels over > > with "if not a 386 instruction" or something similar). > You need glibc-2.1 but it is still beta. Not necessarily. It works with various 2.0.7 glibcs (e.g. plain RedHat 5.x) with minor corrections. You only have to link with inet6-apps library. R. From kunihiro@zebra.org Tue Dec 22 01:22:32 1998 From: kunihiro@zebra.org (kunihiro@zebra.org) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:22:32 +0900 (JST) Subject: glibc In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 21 Dec 1998 14:41:56 +0100 (CET)" References: Message-ID: <19981222102232Y.kunihiro@zebra.org> >v2.0.95 == glibc-2.1 > >I'm currenlty using 2.0.99. Please check the README file very carefully. >You really have to use the versions of make, binutils and gcc mentioned, >or the compile will fail in one or the other way. Yes glibc 2.1 is frequently updated, the latest version is glibc-2.0.108. I've commited patch to IPv6 related header recently. It'll need more test about IPv6... I think at this moment using inet6-apps-0.XX is easier than glibc-2.1. But in the long run inet6-apps function should be supported by glibc-2.1. If you are interested in glibc-2.1. Please visit ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/ -- Kunihiro Ishiguro From Alain.Durand@imag.fr Wed Dec 23 15:54:26 1998 From: Alain.Durand@imag.fr (Alain Durand) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 16:54:26 +0100 Subject: Interim meeting Web server Message-ID: <199812231555.QAA24629@imag.imag.fr> Hi, I've set up a web server to gather information about the interim meeting in Grenoble http://www.ipv6.imag.fr/ietf1999.html This server is dual stack IPv4 & IPv6, so onecan browse it from the 6bone. It will be updated periodicaly. - Alain. From Francis.Dupont@inria.fr Wed Dec 23 18:41:22 1998 From: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr (Francis Dupont) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 19:41:22 +0100 Subject: Cable Modem In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat, 19 Dec 1998 00:15:04 -1000. <367B7CA7.B9A8B415@hawaii.rr.com> Message-ID: <199812231841.TAA19924@givry.inria.fr> In your previous mail you wrote: I have a cable modem.... and would like to connect to the 6bone... unfortunately every few months my IP address will change.... this would probably not be possible? if it is please let me know =] => it is possible but I believe you are a good candidate for Alain Durand's last proposal: a user-friendly/fast way to setup configured tunnels... Francis.Dupont@inria.fr From rlfink@lbl.gov Sun Dec 27 16:08:44 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 08:08:44 -0800 Subject: pTLA request from IPF.NET In-Reply-To: <36830089.76AFCB6B@ipf.de> Message-ID: <4.1.19981227080438.01ac8be0@cnrmail.lbl.gov> 6bone folk, The IPF.NET folk in Germany have requested pTLA status (see below). I would like to have comments pro and con on this, to me or the mailer. I will close the discussion for a final decision on 11 Jan 98. Thanks, Bob At 04:03 AM 12/25/98 +0100, Jan Czmok wrote: > >Dear Bob. > >I am Senior Network Engineer for IPF.NET (which is one of the 5 BIG >Providers in Germany) >and head of the IPv6 project at IPF.NET. We would like to apply for a >pTLA assignment. > >IPF.NET currently hosts over 30.000 private Users and about 5000 >commercial Customers in Germany. >We have also connected research companies and institutions. > >We have been working with IPv6 in the last year (1998) with the goal of >providing a ipv6 testbed >and later on (as soon as possible stable implementations of ios and >software exist) offer production >ipv6 (for leased lines and also dial-up "mobile ip" using ipv6) > >1. must have experience with ipv6 in the 6bone, at least as a leaf >site, and preferably as an NLA transit under a pTLA. > >We are operating a 6bone Testbed at IPF.NET and have established tunnels >with various sites >including REGIO-DE/DE (Leaf) and JOIN/DE (ptla) and running bgp4+ >routing peer with both >and have some more private "test" tunnels to various systems within our >network. > >We currently have a network under JOIN/DE (whois query output) : > >ipv6-site: IPF >origin: AS5409 >descr: IPF.NET Service Provider GmbH >country: DE >prefix: 3FFE:400:1D0::/48 >application: ping cisco.ipv6.ipf.net >tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 cisco.ipv6.ipf.net -> 6bone.uni-muenster.de >JOIN BGP4+ >tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 cisco.ipv6.ipf.net -> 6bone.regio.net >REGIO-DE BGP4+ >contact: JC2-6BONE >remarks: Willing to add tunnels (BGP4+ preferred) >remarks: connected to DFN/Ten-34, Own International Network, >Uplink >remarks: through AT&T UNISOURCE >remarks: peering at MAE-FFM and DE-CIX, INXS and LINX >remarks: DNS/bind-8 will be operational soon. >notify: czmok@ipf.de >changed: czmok@ipf.net 19981223 >source: 6BONE > >person: Jan Czmok >address: IPF.NET GmbH >address: Mainzer Landstrasse 46 >address: D-60325 Frankfurt >address: Germany >phone: +49 69 17084 0 >fax-no: +49 69 17084 26 >e-mail: czmok@ipf.net >nic-hdl: JC2-6BONE >remarks: see also JC226-RIPE >notify: routing@ipf.net >changed: czmok@ipf.net 19980615 >source: 6BONE > >2. must have the ability and intent to provide "production-like" 6bone >backbone service to provide a robust and operationally reliable 6bone >backbone. > >We are directly present at MAE-WEST / MAE-EAST, PAIX, >MAE-F, DECIX, INXS and LINX now . > >AMS-IX, SPRINTNAP and BNIX will be added during next year. > >Backup - Uplink is provided by AT&T UNISOURCE and UUnet. > >3. must have a potential "user community" that would be served by >becoming a pTLA, e.g., the requester is a major player in a region, >country or focus of interest. > >We are currently in the top-5 of the germany providers servicing >more than 30.000 users. > >4. must commit to abide by whatever the 6bone backbone operational >rules and policies are (currently there are no formal ones, but the >alain duran draft is a start in trying to define some). > >we hereby state that will abide to the 6bone operational rules and >policies. > > > >Greetings and merry, merry Christmas (hope you got many christmas gifts) > >Jan Czmok >Senior Network Engineer >IPF.NET > From rlfink@lbl.gov Sun Dec 27 23:11:54 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 15:11:54 -0800 Subject: pTLA request from IPF.NET In-Reply-To: References: <4.1.19981227080438.01ac8be0@cnrmail.lbl.gov> Message-ID: <4.1.19981227150546.021c7620@cnrmail.lbl.gov> Bernhard, At 10:21 PM 12/27/98 +0100, Bernhard Kroenung wrote: >> The IPF.NET folk in Germany have requested pTLA status (see below). I would >> like to have comments pro and con on this, to me or the mailer. >> >> I will close the discussion for a final decision on 11 Jan 98. > >As I remeber - RIPE will delegate IPv6 Address-Space starting '99 ... and >you shurely mean 11-Jan-99 - don't you ? So why is there a need of this ? Though the address registries will hopefully start to assign production IPv6 addresses by the end of 1Q 99 (end March 99?), there is still a need for sites and networks to experiment with IPv6. In fact, at this very early stage of IPv6 production deployment, I think it important that ISPs get experience with IPv6 in a pTLA or transit NLA 6bone environment prior to making a TLA/Sub-TLA request to the registries. Thanks for catching my error, I did mean 11 Jan 99 to close the IPF.NET pTLA request period. Regards, Bob From tony@lava.net Tue Dec 29 14:17:50 1998 From: tony@lava.net (Antonio Querubin) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 04:17:50 -1000 (HST) Subject: pTLA request from IPF.NET In-Reply-To: <4.1.19981227150546.021c7620@cnrmail.lbl.gov> Message-ID: On Sun, 27 Dec 1998, Bob Fink wrote: > Though the address registries will hopefully start to assign production > IPv6 addresses by the end of 1Q 99 (end March 99?), there is still a need > for sites and networks to experiment with IPv6. In fact, at this very early > stage of IPv6 production deployment, I think it important that ISPs get > experience with IPv6 in a pTLA or transit NLA 6bone environment prior to > making a TLA/Sub-TLA request to the registries. Unfortunately some upstream providers wont or can't do this. After two months of no response, our normally accomodating upstream provider ANS, finally told us today they don't support ipv6 and declined our request for an experimental tunnel and address space. Anybody out there willing to provide us some address space and a tunnel? Antonio Querubin tony@lava.net / ah6bw@hawaii.ampr.org From rlfink@lbl.gov Wed Dec 30 01:24:04 1998 From: rlfink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 17:24:04 -0800 Subject: Fwd: Request for pTLA Message-ID: <4.1.19981229171908.00a26920@cnrmail.lbl.gov> 6bone folk, The regio.net (regio-de on the 6bone) folk in Germany have requested pTLA status (see below). I would like to have comments pro and con on this, to me or the mailer. I will close the discussion for a final decision on 12 Jan 98. Thanks, Bob === >From: horke@mail.regio.net (Bernhard Kroenung) >Subject: Request for pTLA >To: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov >Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1998 20:34:38 +0100 (MET) > >Dear Bob > >I am CEO of regio[.NET] GmbH - and resposible of the ipv6 project and our >connection to the 6bone. We've been working on IPv6 since the beginning of >1998 and provide uplink for two other leaf-sites in germany. We also >participate in the RIPE-WG and and I attendet RIPE-Sessions on RIPE-30 and >RIPE-31. > >We are also planning a project with the Fachhochschule Fulda - an academic >site starting to work on IPv6 - with two Professors already publishing some >interesting books on IPv6/IPnG. > >Our Backbone includes connections on DE-CIX and MAE-Frankfurt with uplinks >to teleglobe and DFN/Ten-155 - we currently run nearly 20 PoP around >Germany (mainly in the central part). > >Our goal will to establish a broader IPv6-Backbone while providing a testbed >for a couple of customers developing software and/or hardware where it will >be essential that they a capable of IPv6 in the Future. > > > 1. must have experience with ipv6 in the 6bone, at least as a leaf > site, and preferably as an NLA transit under a pTLA. > >A you can see in our 6bone-db (regio-de) we provide uplink for IPF and >SPACENET while connecting to a couple of other pTLA-sites. There are >requests from others providers peering with us to participate on 6bone >while connecting through us as an uplink. > >We run IPv6-capable DNS and use IPv6 on different platforms (mainly CISCO >on backbone) >At the moment we use a part of the JOIN pTLA-space - and have also been >delegated a space-delegation by SPRINT. > > 2. must have the ability and intent to provide "production-like" 6bone > backbone service to provide a robust and operationally reliable 6bone > backbone. > >At the moment we are installing additional routers at selected sites to >implent a ipv6-backbone in neighborhood of our IPv4-Backbone to extend >out IPv6-service to selected customers and also to other providers peering >with us to test there IPv6-infrastructure. > > 3. must have a potential "user community" that would be served by > becoming a pTLA, e.g., the requester is a major player in a region, > country or focus of interest. > >We currently are a "major player" in the central region of germany and >consider ourselves as one of the larger smaller ISPs in germany. We currently >run 20 PoPs and growing ... > > 4. must commit to abide by whatever the 6bone backbone operational > rules and policies are (currently there are no formal ones, but the > alain duran draft is a start in trying to define some). > >we hereby state that will abide to the 6bone operational rules and >policies. > > >We look forward to your response. > > Ciao > Bernhard >-- >Bernhard Kroenung, Bahnhofstr 8, 36157 Ebersburg/Rhoen, Germany +49 6656 910101 >@work : bernhard@kroenung.de Work: +49 661 9011777 >@home : horke@Rhoen.De @school : Bernhard.Kroenung@Informatik.FH-Fulda.De