From hswu@ns.6test.edu.cn Sat Jun 3 09:59:57 2000 From: hswu@ns.6test.edu.cn (Haisang Wu) Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2000 16:59:57 +0800 (CST) Subject: About address allocating In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20000518115347.01cf2058@imap2.es.net> from Bob Fink at "May 18, 2000 12: 4:58 pm" Message-ID: <200006030859.QAA18964@ns.6test.edu.cn> hi,dear Bob: Sorry to trouble you again. CERNET decided to allocate only /48 to SLAs, not /56 or sth else. And, a sTLA is far from enough to China with such a large population. Now we are going to do allocating in CERNET now. I wonder if other sTLAs have had experience in allocating, especialy in technical details. But last time the URL you gave me http://esnet-v6r2.es.net/ is not accessible, I cannot see their detailed plan. Could you or any friend give me some help? best Haisang Wu From fink@es.net Sat Jun 3 22:26:04 2000 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2000 14:26:04 -0700 Subject: About address allocating In-Reply-To: <200006030859.QAA18964@ns.6test.edu.cn> References: <4.2.2.20000518115347.01cf2058@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20000603142337.023a9c90@imap2.es.net> At 04:59 PM 6/3/2000 +0800, Haisang Wu wrote: >hi,dear Bob: > Sorry to trouble you again. > CERNET decided to allocate only /48 to SLAs, not /56 or sth else. >And, a sTLA is far from enough to China with such a large population. > Now we are going to do allocating in CERNET now. I wonder if other >sTLAs have had experience in allocating, especialy in technical details. >But last time the URL you gave me http://esnet-v6r2.es.net/ is not >accessible, I cannot see their detailed plan. Could you or any friend >give me some help? It seems busted. I think some ESnet web work is going on, but I'll get it fixed and let you know. Bob From vuile@es.net Mon Jun 5 02:40:21 2000 From: vuile@es.net (Vui Le) Date: Sun, 04 Jun 2000 18:40:21 -0700 Subject: About address allocating In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 03 Jun 2000 14:26:04 PDT." <4.3.1.2.20000603142337.023a9c90@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <200006050140.SAA01145@laihwa.es.net> Please try www-6bone.es.net. The server was recently upgraded and given a more appropriate name. Thanks. - Vui > At 04:59 PM 6/3/2000 +0800, Haisang Wu wrote: > >hi,dear Bob: > > Sorry to trouble you again. > > CERNET decided to allocate only /48 to SLAs, not /56 or sth else. > >And, a sTLA is far from enough to China with such a large population. > > Now we are going to do allocating in CERNET now. I wonder if other > >sTLAs have had experience in allocating, especialy in technical details. > >But last time the URL you gave me http://esnet-v6r2.es.net/ is not > >accessible, I cannot see their detailed plan. Could you or any friend > >give me some help? > > It seems busted. I think some ESnet web work is going on, but I'll get it > fixed and let you know. > > > Bob ======================================================================== Vui Q. Le Phone: (510) 495-2204 Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Fax : (510) 486-6712 Network Engineering Services Group Email: vuile@es.net Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory URL : http://www.es.net/ ======================================================================== From nsayer@quack.kfu.com Mon Jun 5 16:14:44 2000 From: nsayer@quack.kfu.com (Nick Sayer) Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2000 08:14:44 -0700 Subject: IPv6 FreeBSD mirror Message-ID: <393BC3E4.FF0B280D@quack.kfu.com> I thought I had announced this already, but I think I forgot. There is an IPv6-only www and ftp mirror of FreeBSD available at mirror.sftw.com, courtesey of Enlighten Software. I don't believe that IPv6 only installations of FreeBSD work yet, but folks who want to are welcome to try. It's not an absolutely complete mirror, but most of the important stuff is there. Comments are welcome. From itojun@itojun.org Tue Jun 6 03:08:30 2000 From: itojun@itojun.org (Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino) Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 11:08:30 +0900 Subject: N+I IPv6 showcase booth Message-ID: <13626.960257310@lychee.itojun.org> # Sorry if you have got this message twice, I have sent this once # but seen no delivery back to myself... At NetWorld+Interop tokyo (June 7-9), We have a booth named "IPv6 showcase". We will demonstrate: - an IPv6 network in a booth, by using routers/end nodes from more-than-10 vendors - IPv6 web client/server (including Win2K IE) - IPv6 ftp client/server - and of course, as always, IPv6 quake! We will also have bunch of presentations at the booth, highlighting recent deployment and product status. We should also note that, in N+I tokyo, - we have IPv6-only zone in terminal cluster - NOC provides IPv6-to-IPv4 translator (based on tcp relay) (so you have no problem even if you have no IPv4 reachability) - all drop cables to booth are IPv4/v6 dual stack ready Kudos to NOC guys! If you cannot visit N+I tokyo, the following IPv6 servers are waiting for your accesses, feel free to fight with the visitors by "quake over IPv6"! quake: quakeserver.ipv6showcase.jp.interop.net web: http://www-kame.ipv6showcase.jp.interop.net/ web: http://www-kondara.ipv6showcase.jp.interop.net/ web: http://www-ms.ipv6showcase.jp.interop.net/ itojun From sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn Tue Jun 6 12:26:54 2000 From: sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn (sunym) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 19:26:54 +0800 Subject: A TYRO'S QUESTION Message-ID: <002b01bfcfaa$1edc3080$b45d77ca@608proxy.nt608> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFCFED.2C2E64E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I AM A CHINESE STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A = IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO CONNECT WITH = 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I TYPE=20 " PING6 ::131.107.65.121" THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST TIMMED OUT" AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A = WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING 131.107.65.121" ,THE RESULT IS NORMAL.WHY? ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFCFED.2C2E64E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
     I AM A = CHINESE=20 STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO CONNECT = WITH=20 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I TYPE=20
" PING6 = ::131.107.65.121"
THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST = TIMMED=20 OUT" AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING=20 131.107.65.121" ,THE RESULT IS = NORMAL.WHY?
------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFCFED.2C2E64E0-- From thejoker@infostream.ro Tue Jun 6 22:55:21 2000 From: thejoker@infostream.ro (Radu Malica) Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 00:55:21 +0300 Subject: reverse ipv6 Message-ID: <393D7349.A09C5635@infostream.ro> Hello I need help if you can do this you are the greatest. I have 2001:600:4:80cf::0/64 delegation w/ reverse DNS. I read the FAQ on ipv6 dns like thousands times and tried like 20 examples...Nothing seems to be working so my reverse works for this class. Can you help me ? Radu From psb@ast.cam.ac.uk Wed Jun 7 07:55:55 2000 From: psb@ast.cam.ac.uk (Peter Bunclark) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 07:55:55 +0100 (BST) Subject: reverse ipv6 In-Reply-To: <393D7349.A09C5635@infostream.ro> Message-ID: On Wed, 7 Jun 2000, Radu Malica wrote: > Hello > I need help if you can do this you are the greatest. I have > 2001:600:4:80cf::0/64 delegation w/ reverse DNS. I read the FAQ on ipv6 > dns like thousands times and tried like 20 examples...Nothing seems to > be working so my reverse works for this class. Can you help me ? Well only if you give details of what you've tried so far! Pete. > > Radu > From woeber@cc.univie.ac.at Wed Jun 7 10:25:50 2000 From: woeber@cc.univie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet) Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 11:25:50 +0200 Subject: reverse ipv6 Message-ID: <009EB3FB.99177036.1@cc.univie.ac.at> >Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 00:55:21 +0300 >From: Radu Malica >To: 6bone@ISI.EDU >Subject: reverse ipv6 > >Hello >I need help if you can do this you are the greatest. I have >2001:600:4:80cf::0/64 delegation w/ reverse DNS. I read the FAQ on ipv6 >dns like thousands times and tried like 20 examples...Nothing seems to >be working so my reverse works for this class. Can you help me ? > >Radu Feel free to have a look at http://noc.aco.net/ipv6/extern/IPv6-LAN-NIG.html and the "Implementation Status: DNS" in particular. This stuff is a snapshot for bind 9 beta 2. We started to work on beta 3 already, so things might change in due course :-) Wilfried. _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber@CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From victor@ua.pt Wed Jun 7 11:20:29 2000 From: victor@ua.pt (Victor Marques) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 11:20:29 +0100 Subject: Multicast/Unicast Routing in IPv6 References: <002b01bfcfaa$1edc3080$b45d77ca@608proxy.nt608> Message-ID: <007301bfd06a$018de350$28ac89c1@odyssey> Hi all. First of all, sorry to those that receive more than one copy of this message. I'm trying to find out more about Multicast and Anycast Routing in IPv6 and it seems that there is not much. Can anybody give me some pointers, such as sites to look, experiments, documents, applications using these features, etc... anything at all. Thanks a lot, Victor From thejoker@infostream.ro Wed Jun 7 12:51:16 2000 From: thejoker@infostream.ro (Radu Malica) Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 14:51:16 +0300 Subject: Details Message-ID: <393E3734.2154E28F@infostream.ro> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------A0117794FD5E2F91D6CF4B74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here are 2 files the named.conf entry and the zone file itself. I tried to do it like in the FAQ at 6bone.net Radu --------------A0117794FD5E2F91D6CF4B74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="2001:600.rev" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2001:600.rev" @ IN SOA box.infostream.ro. root.infostream.ro. ( 3047124 3H 15M 1W 1D) IN NS ns.infostream.ro. IN NS box.infostream.ro. 1 IN PTR UUnet-ipv6-gw.ipv6.infostream.ro. 2 IN PTR UUnet-infostream.ipv6.infostream.ro. 3 IN PTR home.ipv6.infostream.ro. 4 IN PTR home-gw.ipv6.infostream.ro. --------------A0117794FD5E2F91D6CF4B74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="named.conf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="named.conf" // generated by named-bootconf.pl options { directory "/var/named"; /* * If there is a firewall between you and nameservers you want * to talk to, you might need to uncomment the query-source * directive below. Previous versions of BIND always asked * questions using port 53, but BIND 8.1 uses an unprivileged * port by default. */ query-source address * port 53; }; // // a caching only nameserver config // zone "." { type hint; file "named.ca"; }; zone "0.0.127.in-addr.arpa" { type master; file "named.local"; }; zone "45.168.192.in-addr.arpa" { type master; file "45.rev"; }; zone "infostream.ro" { type master; file "infostream.zone"; allow-query { any; }; allow-transfer { 212.35.143.68; 212.35.143.65; 192.162.16.31; 192.162.16.21; 193.230.1/24; 212.212.180.111; 212.35.143.64/26; }; }; zone "LaoMa.info-stream.org" { type master; file "laoma.zone"; allow-query { 194.119.238.162 ;127.0.0.1; 194.119.232.3; 194.119.232.2; 212.35.143.65; 194.134.0.67; 194.134.0.12; 212.35.143.68; 207.172.3.20; 206.138.112.20; 207.172.3.21; 207.172.3.22; }; allow-transfer { none; }; }; zone "64/26.143.35.212.in-addr.arpa" { type master; allow-query { any; }; allow-transfer { 212.35.143.68; 212.35.143.65; 192.16.16.21; 192.162.16.31; 193.230.1/24; }; file "infostream.rev"; }; zone "128/25.75.102.194.in-addr.arpa" { type master; allow-query { any; }; file "75.rev"; }; zone "1.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.ip6.int" { type master; file "localhost.ipv6"; }; zone "ipv6.infostream.ro" { type master; file "ipv6.zone"; }; zone "f.c.0.8.4.0.0.0.0.0.6.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int" { type master; file "2001:600.rev"; }; zone "info-stream.org" { type master; allow-query { any; }; allow-transfer { 212.35.143.65; 193.230.1/24; 212.212.180.111; 212.35.143.64/26; }; file "infostream.org"; }; zone "if-net.org" { type master; file "ifnet.zone"; allow-query { any; }; allow-transfer { any; }; }; --------------A0117794FD5E2F91D6CF4B74-- From psb@ast.cam.ac.uk Wed Jun 7 16:18:52 2000 From: psb@ast.cam.ac.uk (Peter Bunclark) Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 16:18:52 +0100 (BST) Subject: Details In-Reply-To: <393E3734.2154E28F@infostream.ro> Message-ID: Ah. You have: zone "f.c.0.8.4.0.0.0.0.0.6.0.1.0.0.2.ip6.int" and in the file (presumably 2001:600.rev) things like 1 IN PTR UUnet-ipv6-gw.ipv6.infostream.ro. which only adds one `nibble' to f.c.0.8.4.0.0.0.0.0.6.0.1.0.0.2 which is 15 nibbles short of 128 bits. far too short. You need $ORIGIN 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0 1 IN PTR UUnet-ipv6-gw.ipv6.infostream.ro. 2 IN PTR UUnet-infostream.ipv6.infostream.ro. etc. to bring each address up to the right number of bits. You can't leave any out in reverse addressing. Pete. From aangel@haknich.ugc.net Sat Jun 10 02:08:57 2000 From: aangel@haknich.ugc.net (Aaron Angel) Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 21:08:57 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 6bone Registery: The ipv6-site object Message-ID: What is the 'origin' field in the ipv6-site object used for? -- Aaron Angel Voicemail/FAX: +1 (520) 447-2283 UNIX Talk: aangel@haknich.ugc.net From aangel@haknich.ugc.net Mon Jun 12 04:05:44 2000 From: aangel@haknich.ugc.net (Aaron Angel) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 23:05:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: User ipv6 addresses/tunnels Message-ID: How do I go about finding a place to support a 'user' connection to the 6bone? Every place I've tried so far have said they only provide support for educational institutes, government, or members of certain groups... Thanks -- Aaron Angel Voicemail/FAX: +1 (520) 447-2283 UNIX Talk: aangel@haknich.ugc.net From fink@es.net Mon Jun 12 05:15:16 2000 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2000 21:15:16 -0700 Subject: User ipv6 addresses/tunnels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.1.2.20000611211347.00b64158@imap2.es.net> At 11:05 PM 6/11/2000 -0400, you wrote: >How do I go about finding a place to support a 'user' connection to the >6bone? Every place I've tried so far have said they only provide >support for educational institutes, government, or members of certain >groups... Try the tunnel server at Bob From JohnRankin@aol.com Mon Jun 12 16:45:25 2000 From: JohnRankin@aol.com (JohnRankin@aol.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 11:45:25 EDT Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: Hello everyone, I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. John Rankin From psb@ast.cam.ac.uk Tue Jun 13 09:12:24 2000 From: psb@ast.cam.ac.uk (Peter Bunclark) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:12:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, flow control and so on? Pete. On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > From count@flatline.de Tue Jun 13 13:28:39 2000 From: count@flatline.de (Andreas 'Count' Kotes) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:28:39 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi! > On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Peter Bunclark wrote: > Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions > of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly > fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, > flow control and so on? well, with IBM more and more moving towards Linux and Open Source one has at least the option to use an operating system capable of IPv6 :) besides that, IPv6 is inevitable. Maybe not in the next 2 years, but definitely in 10 or even 5. (don't bug me if its getting 20 years - then the transition group really fucked it up) Count -- Andreas 'Count' Kotes - IT specialist, consultant and developer - Contact me. mailto:count@flatline.de - mailto:count@linux.de - mailto:count@convergence.de Your only limit is the hardware, as long as you've got access to the source... -= Commercial use of my email addresses NOT allowed. OpenPGP key available. =- From jsaker@pensat.com Tue Jun 13 14:44:10 2000 From: jsaker@pensat.com (James Saker Jr.) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 08:44:10 -0500 Subject: FW: Question about the future (of mainframes?) Message-ID: <0622C1632EC6D211997A0008C70961733FF55A@geneva.pensat.com> John -- Are these things still alive out there? I thought they tore the last ones out before Y2K! (kidding) Actually, I'd have to guess some of your customers are telecom companies that use the systems for billing applications. One of the primary drivers for us with reference to IPv6 has been the ability of our operational support systems (OSS) to be able to interact, manage, mediate and track the anticipated large base of IPv6 devices. 3G mobile devices (phones, pdas, pagers, etc.), for example, will be difficult to manage at best without the back-end OSS infrastructure to support it. Understanding how data intensive telecom mediation and billing can be, I'd have to expect that some of your customers are in our category. If they're not asking you for IPv6 support which will be mandatory for these OSS systems, I'd be finding out why. I'd have to expect that the absence of any interest is more a reflection of a replacement approach rather than disinterest in the protocol. JRS James R. Saker Jr. jsaker@pensat.com On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > From dcann@vitausa.com Tue Jun 13 14:48:59 2000 From: dcann@vitausa.com (Dwayne Cann) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 09:48:59 -0400 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: <45FEAFDD796ED2119D2000A0C9EAFFC405CBDB@mail.vitausa.com> Given the lack of addressing space, it is a matter of time, is'nt it? -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bunclark [mailto:psb@ast.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 4:12 AM To: JohnRankin@aol.com Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Question about the future Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, flow control and so on? Pete. On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > From hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com Tue Jun 13 14:52:48 2000 From: hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com (hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:52:48 +0100 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: <802568FD.004C7248.00@uk-emamta003.uk.pw.com> Memo from Hasan Ali of PricewaterhouseCoopers -------------------- Start of message text -------------------- No, but IBM mainframes have been around for a very long time - many as you know - still in production and (like e.g. OpenVMS systems) there are some on the (public) Internet. Be worthwhile for them to have an IPV6 stack available... ...Although how long has IPV4 been available for IBM mainframes? Six years? SNA gateways - needed until fairly recently I seem to recall.. (Do you remember them - huge damn cables connected directly to the IBM boxes...) The number of relieved mainframes guys - "look you don't need to retire us - we can talk to the rest of the network, honest!!" Do you know how many of these things are still out there?! Also how many in active production (the back end of all sorts of web sites...) (Might throw in a line about how robust this "legacy" technology is... But will assume that's known...) Regards, Hasan Peter Bunclark on 13/06/2000 09:12:24 To: JohnRankin@aol.com cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Question about the future Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, flow control and so on? Pete. On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > --------------------- End of message text -------------------- The principal place of business of PricewaterhouseCoopers and its associate partnerships is 1 Embankment Place, London WC2N 6NN where lists of the partners' names are available for inspection. All partners in the associate partnerships are authorised to conduct business as agents of, and all contracts for services to clients are with, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The UK firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers is authorised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales to carry on investment business. PricewaterhouseCoopers is a member of the world-wide PricewaterhouseCoopers organisation. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From JohnRankin@aol.com Tue Jun 13 15:33:18 2000 From: JohnRankin@aol.com (JohnRankin@aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:33:18 EDT Subject: FW: Question about the future (of mainframes?) Message-ID: <69.62a70fd.2677a02e@aol.com> In a message dated 6/13/2000 9:49:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jsaker@pensat.com writes: > John -- Are these things still alive out there? I thought they tore the last > ones out before Y2K! (kidding) > > Actually, I'd have to guess some of your customers are telecom companies > that use the systems for billing applications. One of the primary drivers > for us with reference to IPv6 has been the ability of our operational > support systems (OSS) to be able to interact, manage, mediate and track the > anticipated large base of IPv6 devices. 3G mobile devices (phones, pdas, > pagers, etc.), for example, will be difficult to manage at best without the > back-end OSS infrastructure to support it. > > Understanding how data intensive telecom mediation and billing can be, I'd > have to expect that some of your customers are in our category. If they're > not asking you for IPv6 support which will be mandatory for these OSS > systems, I'd be finding out why. I'd have to expect that the absence of any > interest is more a reflection of a replacement approach rather than > disinterest in the protocol. > > JRS > > James R. Saker Jr. This is a very interesting point. The segment of the industry that we service is the classic big iron traditional mainframe site. In general there are about 5-9% of our mainframe customers that leave the platform each year, however, it is wrong to assume that the mainframe industry is not still thriving and attempting to move into the modern world. At this point TCP/IP is the fastest growing product introduced to our segment in about 20 years. I personally have never seen anything like it. Since the mainframe is a large server within the environment, it is hard to estimate how many personal workstations are using our software, but conservatively its around 3-4 million, and growing about 700,000 per year. I do not find these number to be embarrassing, and they clearly show that mainframe shops have a commitment to TCP/IP. I only that the time to point out some of these things, because most of the comments I have received include the idea that the mainframe is dead or dying. This is far from the truth. The mainframe environments that remain are serious data processing people, with real world concerns and interests. Now, I do find it interesting that we have not had more questions about mobile computing devices. It is quite possible that there is very little mainframe software geared towards these types of devices and therein lays the lack of interest. But e-business is the most recent major movement within the IBM world, and I find it hard to envision true e-business without mobile computing. John Rankin From JBrown@thrupoint.net Tue Jun 13 15:37:46 2000 From: JBrown@thrupoint.net (Brown, James) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:37:46 -0400 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: Another question to ask is: "Do you wish the IBM mainframe to be able to communicate with Microsoft IPv6 platforms, Cisco, 3Com, Bay, Lucent, [insert favorite vendor here] networks in the 1-10 year future?" These URLs will help get you started... www.ipv6forum.org www.stardust.com www.6bone.net jpb === -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bunclark To: JohnRankin@aol.com Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Sent: 6/13/00 4:12 AM Subject: Re: Question about the future Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, flow control and so on? Pete. On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > From aa@pure.boza.org Tue Jun 13 15:56:50 2000 From: aa@pure.boza.org (atanas argirov) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 16:56:50 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin For such profitable business as mainframes, IBM has to be in a hurry to implement ipv6 stack ASAP. Otherwise it will be one more minus for IBM. I'm really wondering that nobody of IBM customers asked for ipv6 support yet? But, even to be the first one: Yes, we, like mainframe customers of IBM and company which is paying enough money for licensing on monthly basis, we demand IPv6 stack in OS/390. On which release it will be available: R9? Cheers, atanas argirov From jochen@scram.de Tue Jun 13 14:51:45 2000 From: jochen@scram.de (Jochen Friedrich) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:51:45 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Peter, On Tue, 13 Jun 2000, Peter Bunclark wrote: > Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions > of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly > fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, > flow control and so on? I believe, problems will start with a more widespread use of TCP/IP instead of SNA on mainframes. With Enterprise extender replacing the old SNI networks, more and more companies will have to connect their internal networks with TCP/IP and use NAT and DNS translations (which has other impacts like the need to rewrite layer 7 information in some cases). > On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. Strange... I know at least one client (a german bank) who did ask... Cheers, Jochen From brian@hursley.ibm.com Tue Jun 13 16:21:23 2000 From: brian@hursley.ibm.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:21:23 -0500 Subject: Question about the future References: Message-ID: <39465173.A647C47C@hursley.ibm.com> The attached message was apparently NOT sent by anyone from IBM - in fact we have no idea who sent it - it does not in any way represent IBM's views. As a matter of fact IBM has already made an IPv6 download available for IBM mainframes, and we released IPv6 for the AIX operating system in 1997. So please ignore the message and the alleged sender. Regards - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Brian E Carpenter Program Director, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM On assignment for IBM at http://www.iCAIR.org Attend INET 2000: http://www.isoc.org/inet2000 Non-IBM email: brian@icair.org JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin From Latif.LADID@village.uunet.lu Tue Jun 13 16:57:37 2000 From: Latif.LADID@village.uunet.lu (Latif LADID) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:57:37 +0200 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000613175130.00b7edc0@j.pop.uunet.lu> IBM has some of the best experts in-house on this subject!!!!!!! Ask Brian, copied above! /Latif At 09:12 13/06/00 +0100, Peter Bunclark wrote: >Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions >of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly >fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, >flow control and so on? > >Pete. > >On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > > > John Rankin > > From bound@zk3.dec.com Tue Jun 13 17:33:29 2000 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:33:29 -0400 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 13 Jun 2000 10:21:23 CDT." <39465173.A647C47C@hursley.ibm.com> Message-ID: <200006131633.MAA0000009573@yquarry.zk3.dec.com> Brian, I think we should track down the author of this mail and make a federal case out of it? This is unacceptable to IBM or any company. I am appalled by such behavior. That mail could have leaked to a critical account situation in the IBM field and had a negative impact on IBM. I consider such bogus mail criminal. And it should be dealt with as such. regards, /jim From dredd@megacity.org Tue Jun 13 19:56:07 2000 From: dredd@megacity.org (Derek J. Balling) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 11:56:07 -0700 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <39465173.A647C47C@hursley.ibm.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20000613115451.00bc5db0@mail.megacity.org> Are there 3rd party stacks for IBM 'frames? Nowhere does he claim to be from IBM, so it could as easily be a 3rd-party vendor... D At 10:21 AM 6/13/00 -0500, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >The attached message was apparently NOT sent by anyone from IBM - >in fact we have no idea who sent it - it does not in any way represent >IBM's views. As a matter of fact IBM has already made an IPv6 download >available for IBM mainframes, and we released IPv6 for the AIX operating >system in 1997. So please ignore the message and the alleged sender. > >Regards > >- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Brian E Carpenter >Program Director, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM >On assignment for IBM at http://www.iCAIR.org >Attend INET 2000: http://www.isoc.org/inet2000 >Non-IBM email: brian@icair.org > >JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > > > > Hello everyone, > > > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm > wondering if > > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit > opinions. > > > > John Rankin From JohnRankin@aol.com Tue Jun 13 20:18:47 2000 From: JohnRankin@aol.com (JohnRankin@aol.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:18:47 EDT Subject: Question about the future (of mainframes?) Message-ID: <9c.49b3f2d.2677e317@aol.com> Gentlemen, There seems to be a bit of confusion about who or what I represent, so I thought I would take a moment to explain. I am the director of development for Connectivity Systems Incorporated. We are not IBM, nor do I work or speak for IBM. However, we do develop and maintain the TCP/IP stack for the IBM VSE environment. This stack is sold by IBM as if it was their own, and therefore we at Connectivity Systems work very closely with IBM. Furthermore, IBM is a very large and extensive company, with several operating systems running on the system 390 platform. IBM does develop directly, a TCP/IP stack for VM and OS/390, and I personally have no information about what efforts are underway within IBM with regard to these platforms. If this has caused any confusion then I truly apologize. John Rankin Director of Development Connectivity Systems Inc. From Latif.LADID@village.uunet.lu Wed Jun 14 00:36:52 2000 From: Latif.LADID@village.uunet.lu (Latif LADID) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 01:36:52 +0200 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <200006131633.MAA0000009573@yquarry.zk3.dec.com> References: Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20000614012452.00b87210@j.pop.uunet.lu> I would just ask the gentleman to officially apologize to the audience he has mislead into an IBM internal issue. Identifying himself and his company should be the minimum! That would at least restore some ethical/professional behavior in the 6bone mailing list! This email is from Seoul, so if the gentleman expressed himself then disregard this email /Latif At 12:33 13/06/00 -0400, Jim Bound wrote: >Brian, > >I think we should track down the author of this mail and make a federal >case out of it? This is unacceptable to IBM or any company. I am >appalled by such behavior. > >That mail could have leaked to a critical account situation in the IBM >field and had a negative impact on IBM. I consider such bogus mail >criminal. And it should be dealt with as such. > >regards, >/jim From rzm@icm.edu.pl Wed Jun 14 01:06:08 2000 From: rzm@icm.edu.pl (Rafal Maszkowski) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 02:06:08 +0200 Subject: host_991531 patch to recognize IPv6 addresses Message-ID: <20000614020608.U6836@burza.icm.edu.pl> I have extended host recognized syntax to IPv6 addresses. With the patch host will transform any of e.g. 3ffe:8010:: 3ffe:8010::1 3ffe:8010::/28 3ffe:8010:2::/28 3ffe:8010:2 3ffe:8010/28 into appropriate ip6.int domain and return the answer: # host -t ns 3ffe:8010/28 1.0.8.E.F.F.3.ip6.int NS ns.isi.edu 1.0.8.E.F.F.3.ip6.int NS 6bone-gw.6bone.pl 1.0.8.E.F.F.3.ip6.int NS ns.shadow.eu.org The patch: ftp://ftp.6bone.pl/pub/ipv6/set-glibc-2.1.new/host_991529+.diff R. PS. I wish bind would include your version of host. -- Ale kto by my³ rêce po przywitaniu siê z mê¿em? - A. Fedorczyk From aangel@haknich.ugc.net Wed Jun 14 06:32:47 2000 From: aangel@haknich.ugc.net (Aaron Angel) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 01:32:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20000614012452.00b87210@j.pop.uunet.lu> Message-ID: For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated quite clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from IBM. -- Aaron Angel Voicemail/FAX: +1 (520) 447-2283 UNIX Talk: aangel@haknich.ugc.net On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Latif LADID wrote: > I would just ask the gentleman to officially apologize to the audience he has mislead > into an IBM internal issue. Identifying himself and his company should be the minimum! > > That would at least restore some ethical/professional behavior in the 6bone mailing list! > > This email is from Seoul, so if the gentleman expressed himself then disregard this email > > /Latif > > At 12:33 13/06/00 -0400, Jim Bound wrote: > >Brian, > > > >I think we should track down the author of this mail and make a federal > >case out of it? This is unacceptable to IBM or any company. I am > >appalled by such behavior. > > > >That mail could have leaked to a critical account situation in the IBM > >field and had a negative impact on IBM. I consider such bogus mail > >criminal. And it should be dealt with as such. > > > >regards, > >/jim > > > From psb@ast.cam.ac.uk Wed Jun 14 10:05:15 2000 From: psb@ast.cam.ac.uk (Peter Bunclark) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:05:15 +0100 (BST) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > quite > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > IBM. > > -- > Aaron Angel On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. Peter. From JohnRankin@aol.com Wed Jun 14 14:09:49 2000 From: JohnRankin@aol.com (JohnRankin@aol.com) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:09:49 EDT Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: In a message dated 6/14/2000 5:13:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, psb@ast.cam.ac.uk writes: > On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > > > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > > quite > > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > > IBM. > > > > -- > > Aaron Angel > > On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The > most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this > mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know > incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might > be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the > TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. > > Peter. Peter, I am so tempted to wade in on this attach against my credentials, but I would like to ask that the 6bone group, please refocus on my original question. I am trying to determine how effected the VSE Mainframe community would be by the indroduction of IP Version 6. Yes, clearly IBM itself has plans for VM and OS/390. But the VSE community is depending upon Connectivity Systems, and I am looking for some serious answers from a group that should know. 1. What types of devices will be ipv6 only? 2. If ipv4 tunnels will exist for some time, then how limiting do you think they will grow? 3. What things are you hearing from your users? 4. Is the issue of ipv6 still just in development labs, or are there real world customers asking about this support? 5. When we add support for ipv6 to VSE, how soon will it be a real requirement? 1 year, 2 years, more? 6. Those of you that have implemented the new layer, how stable are you finding things? 7. I see that Microsoft has provided support for ipv6 in Windows 2000, but why haven't they simply included it into the operating system? Are there that many issues that are causing changes, or is it that its difficult for end users to administer? These are the types of questions I'm looking for answers about. Please forgive me for being late in the game. But that does not mean we are not a serious development house, with serious concerns. John Rankin Director of Development Connectivity Systems Inc. (NOT IBM) From brian@hursley.ibm.com Wed Jun 14 14:15:32 2000 From: brian@hursley.ibm.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 08:15:32 -0500 Subject: Question about the future References: Message-ID: <39478574.4CD5091B@hursley.ibm.com> At this point, I suggest we close this topic... John is now talking directly to those of us working on IPv6 questions inside IBM and that is the best possible outcome. Input on the market needs for IPv6 is always welcome of course, but not necessarily on this list. Brian Peter Bunclark wrote: > > On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > > > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > > quite > > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > > IBM. > > > > -- > > Aaron Angel > > On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The > most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this > mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know > incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might > be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the > TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. > > Peter. From dcann@vitausa.com Wed Jun 14 14:53:58 2000 From: dcann@vitausa.com (Dwayne Cann) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:53:58 -0400 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: <45FEAFDD796ED2119D2000A0C9EAFFC405CBE0@mail.vitausa.com> His choice of language was poor. I too believed he worked for IBM, and was suprised because I knew that IBM supports IPV6 on AIX. His question is valid though. How long before we see widescale implemetation of IPV6? My isp is not yet prepared for it. Dwayne -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bunclark [mailto:psb@ast.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 5:05 AM To: Aaron Angel Cc: Latif LADID; 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Question about the future On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > quite > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > IBM. > > -- > Aaron Angel On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. Peter. From zszhang@krdl.org.sg Wed Jun 14 15:21:13 2000 From: zszhang@krdl.org.sg (Zhang Zhi Shou) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 22:21:13 +0800 (SGT) Subject: netkit package Message-ID: Hi, Following the steps of IPv6 HOWTO, I have compiled the kernel, and installed net-tools package. It seems ok, one ipv6-in-ipv4 interface appears in the interface list. But when I install the nkit-0.4.1, I got some error during the compilation. The error is: /usr/bin/ld: cannot open -lncurses : No such file or directory I also checked the packages installed in my machine, the output of "rpm -qa | grep ncurses" is: ncurses-4.2-25 Anybody could help me with this!! thanks in advance. zzs From rirving@onecall.net Wed Jun 14 16:43:34 2000 From: rirving@onecall.net (Rick Irving) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:43:34 -0500 Subject: Question about the future References: Message-ID: <3947A826.12370C28@onecall.net> > On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. > The > most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this > mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know > incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. Hrmmm.. Never forget, "English" is a tricky language, as you seem to be learning.... :) From dredd@megacity.org Wed Jun 14 18:33:05 2000 From: dredd@megacity.org (Derek J. Balling) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:33:05 -0700 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <45FEAFDD796ED2119D2000A0C9EAFFC405CBE0@mail.vitausa.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20000614103136.00baed70@mail.megacity.org> You see, I totally disagree. I saw the phrase "one of the TCP/IP stacks" and instantly said "A-Ha! Competitive market for stacks!" I don't think there was any "unclear-ness" in his statement at all. Maybe some people are just so accustomed to "only one vendor available to support your OS" that they forget about competitive portions of the industry. =) D At 09:53 AM 6/14/00 -0400, Dwayne Cann wrote: >His choice of language was poor. I too believed he worked for IBM, and was >suprised because I knew that IBM supports IPV6 on AIX. His question is valid >though. How long before we see widescale implemetation of IPV6? My isp is >not yet prepared for it. > > >Dwayne > > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Peter Bunclark [mailto:psb@ast.cam.ac.uk] >Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 5:05 AM >To: Aaron Angel >Cc: Latif LADID; 6bone@ISI.EDU >Subject: Re: Question about the future > > > > >On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > > > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > > quite > > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > > IBM. > > > > -- > > Aaron Angel > >On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The >most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this >mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know >incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might >be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the >TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. > >Peter. From jim@thehousleys.net Wed Jun 14 18:46:01 2000 From: jim@thehousleys.net (James Housley) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 13:46:01 -0400 Subject: Question about the future References: <45FEAFDD796ED2119D2000A0C9EAFFC405CBE0@mail.vitausa.com> Message-ID: <3947C4D9.D17ADD43@thehousleys.net> Dwayne Cann wrote: > > His choice of language was poor. I too believed he worked for IBM, and was > suprised because I knew that IBM supports IPV6 on AIX. His question is valid > though. How long before we see widescale implemetation of IPV6? My isp is > not yet prepared for it. > You are more likely to see IPv6 in "widespread" use in new technologies, ie cellular phone type devices and similar. It will be several years before widespread ISP use in the US. *BSD and Linux are IPv6 capable, and others, but the consumers are Micro$loth based. NT4 has an IPv6 addon to tunnel through IPv4, it can't even connect to a IPv6 network. This is just how I see it happening. Jim -- "Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines" -- Anon From bound@zk3.dec.com Wed Jun 14 19:28:07 2000 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 14:28:07 -0400 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:33:05 PDT." <4.3.2.7.2.20000614103136.00baed70@mail.megacity.org> Message-ID: <200006141828.OAA0000026224@yquarry.zk3.dec.com> can we move on John has cleared up the issue. we are beating a dead horse. p.s. John the place to ask market and readiness questions for IPv6 is on the IPv6 forum list. members@ipv6forum.com or the IPv6 deployment list deployment@ipv6.org... I will respond to your questions in private when I can find the time as they are not just off the top of my head responses and very serious and worthwhile questions. /jim From aangel@haknich.ugc.net Wed Jun 14 22:48:48 2000 From: aangel@haknich.ugc.net (Aaron Angel) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 17:48:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <3947C4D9.D17ADD43@thehousleys.net> Message-ID: > > ... > You are more likely to see IPv6 in "widespread" use in new technologies, > ie cellular phone type devices and similar. It will be several years > before widespread ISP use in the US. *BSD and Linux are IPv6 capable, > and others, but the consumers are Micro$loth based. NT4 has an IPv6 > addon to tunnel through IPv4, it can't even connect to a IPv6 network. There's an IPv6 TCP/IP stack for Windows 9x/NT/2000 also. If anyone's tried it (both the MS version for NT/2000 and/or the trumpt version for 9x), let me know what it's like...how stable it is, etc. From aangel@haknich.ugc.net Thu Jun 15 00:57:56 2000 From: aangel@haknich.ugc.net (Aaron Angel) Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 19:57:56 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000614103136.00baed70@mail.megacity.org> Message-ID: Exactly. 'one of the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' != '*the* TCP/IP stack provided my IBM for mainframes'...that's how I see it. -- Aaron Angel Voicemail/FAX: +1 (520) 447-2283 UNIX Talk: aangel@haknich.ugc.net On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Derek J. Balling wrote: > You see, I totally disagree. I saw the phrase "one of the TCP/IP stacks" > and instantly said "A-Ha! Competitive market for stacks!" > > I don't think there was any "unclear-ness" in his statement at all. Maybe > some people are just so accustomed to "only one vendor available to support > your OS" that they forget about competitive portions of the industry. =) > > D > > > At 09:53 AM 6/14/00 -0400, Dwayne Cann wrote: > >His choice of language was poor. I too believed he worked for IBM, and was > >suprised because I knew that IBM supports IPV6 on AIX. His question is valid > >though. How long before we see widescale implemetation of IPV6? My isp is > >not yet prepared for it. > > > > > >Dwayne > > > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Peter Bunclark [mailto:psb@ast.cam.ac.uk] > >Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 5:05 AM > >To: Aaron Angel > >Cc: Latif LADID; 6bone@ISI.EDU > >Subject: Re: Question about the future > > > > > > > > > >On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > > > > > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > > > quite > > > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > > > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > > > IBM. > > > > > > -- > > > Aaron Angel > > > >On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The > >most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this > >mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know > >incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might > >be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the > >TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. > > > >Peter. > > From pontus@lysator.liu.se Thu Jun 15 09:19:09 2000 From: pontus@lysator.liu.se (Pontus Lidman) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:19:09 +0200 (MET DST) Subject: netkit package In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Zhang Zhi Shou wrote: > Hi, > > Following the steps of IPv6 HOWTO, I have compiled the kernel, and > installed net-tools package. It seems ok, one ipv6-in-ipv4 interface > appears in the interface list. > > But when I install the nkit-0.4.1, I got some error during the > compilation. The error is: > > /usr/bin/ld: cannot open -lncurses : No such file or directory > > I also checked the packages installed in my machine, the output of "rpm > -qa | grep ncurses" is: > > ncurses-4.2-25 > > Anybody could help me with this!! Yes, you need an rpm for the development files of ncurses, probably called ncurses-dev-x.y.z.rpm. Install it and you will be able to compile. -- Pontus Lidman, pontus@mathcore.com, Software Engineer No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up. Scene: www.dc-s.com | MUD: tyme.envy.com 6969 | irc: irc.quakenet.eu.org From mfa@mfa.eti.br Thu Jun 15 13:40:17 2000 From: mfa@mfa.eti.br (Marcelo Franca Alves (MFA)) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:40:17 -0300 Subject: netkit package References: Message-ID: <007501bfd6c6$deda9980$01a8a8c0@mfa1> See if what you want is in iputils..rpm http://rpmfind.net/linux/redhat/redhat-6.2/i386/RedHat/RPMS/ If you you have RH 6.2 you already have this when you install network. ----- Marcelo Franca Alves (MFA) http://www.mfa.eti.br São Paulo - SP - Brasil ----- Original Message ----- From: Pontus Lidman To: Zhang Zhi Shou Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:19 AM Subject: Re: netkit package > > On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Zhang Zhi Shou wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Following the steps of IPv6 HOWTO, I have compiled the kernel, and > > installed net-tools package. It seems ok, one ipv6-in-ipv4 interface > > appears in the interface list. > > > > But when I install the nkit-0.4.1, I got some error during the > > compilation. The error is: > > > > /usr/bin/ld: cannot open -lncurses : No such file or directory > > > > I also checked the packages installed in my machine, the output of "rpm > > -qa | grep ncurses" is: > > > > ncurses-4.2-25 > > > > Anybody could help me with this!! > > Yes, you need an rpm for the development files of ncurses, probably called > ncurses-dev-x.y.z.rpm. Install it and you will be able to compile. > > -- > Pontus Lidman, pontus@mathcore.com, Software Engineer > No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up. > Scene: www.dc-s.com | MUD: tyme.envy.com 6969 | irc: irc.quakenet.eu.org From mfa@mfa.eti.br Thu Jun 15 13:39:14 2000 From: mfa@mfa.eti.br (Marcelo Franca Alves (MFA)) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:39:14 -0300 Subject: netkit package References: Message-ID: <006f01bfd6c6$b9b24540$01a8a8c0@mfa1> See if what you want is in iputils..rpm http://rpmfind.net/linux/redhat/redhat-6.2/i386/RedHat/RPMS/ If you you have RH 6.2 you already have this in network installation. ----- Marcelo Franca Alves (MFA) http://www.mfa.eti.br São Paulo - SP - Brasil ----- Original Message ----- From: Pontus Lidman To: Zhang Zhi Shou Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:19 AM Subject: Re: netkit package > > On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Zhang Zhi Shou wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Following the steps of IPv6 HOWTO, I have compiled the kernel, and > > installed net-tools package. It seems ok, one ipv6-in-ipv4 interface > > appears in the interface list. > > > > But when I install the nkit-0.4.1, I got some error during the > > compilation. The error is: > > > > /usr/bin/ld: cannot open -lncurses : No such file or directory > > > > I also checked the packages installed in my machine, the output of "rpm > > -qa | grep ncurses" is: > > > > ncurses-4.2-25 > > > > Anybody could help me with this!! > > Yes, you need an rpm for the development files of ncurses, probably called > ncurses-dev-x.y.z.rpm. Install it and you will be able to compile. > > -- > Pontus Lidman, pontus@mathcore.com, Software Engineer > No matter how cynical you get, it's impossible to keep up. > Scene: www.dc-s.com | MUD: tyme.envy.com 6969 | irc: irc.quakenet.eu.org From Matej.Sustic@360.net Thu Jun 15 17:34:44 2000 From: Matej.Sustic@360.net (Matej Sustic) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:34:44 -0700 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: No, he mislead nobody. The misunderstanding came from poor READING of his message (I've misread it as well, but went back and I am willing to admit MY mistake). Just my $0.02 -----Original Message----- From: Peter Bunclark [mailto:psb@ast.cam.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:05 AM To: Aaron Angel Cc: Latif LADID; 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Question about the future On Wed, 14 Jun 2000, Aaron Angel wrote: > For the 'record', I'd like to point out he mislead no one. He stated > quite > clearly in the first sentect he was a director of delevelopment for one of > the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes; he did not say he was directly from > IBM. > > -- > Aaron Angel On the contrary, he mislead many of us by very poor use of language. The most misleading part was, he should have asked IBM first before this mailing list; the wording implied very strongly, and now we know incorrectly, that IBM weren't yet developing IPv6. And I think we might be forgiven for assuming that the `director of development for one of the TCP/IP stacks for IBM mainframes' probably did work for IBM. Peter. From bound@zk3.dec.com Fri Jun 16 03:46:15 2000 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:46:15 -0400 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Jun 2000 09:09:49 EDT." Message-ID: <200006160246.WAA0000826327@anw.zk3.dec.com> John, Several folks sent mail they would like to see my answer in public so here it is. >1. What types of devices will be ipv6 only? Most likely only Internet Appliances for the short to medium term. >2. If ipv4 tunnels will exist for some time, then how limiting do you think >they will grow? The only two limitations I can see (other than the use of tunnels like any technology or VPN): 1. IPv4 Tunnel Enpoints accross the IPv4 Internet require global IPv4 addresses and I don't see that as a problem if one uses 6to4 correctly, as one example. 2. We have not seen yet to my knowledge an extended use of recursive tunnels and what the real limitation is when packets move over IPv4 IPv6 and then IPv4 etc etc etc. Its the ICMP issues really. But I don't think this will be that necessary as the norm. >3. What things are you hearing from your users? All I can say is they say "do IPv6 so we are ready for worst case scenario and so we can started now understanding IPv6 and how to deploy it". >4. Is the issue of ipv6 still just in development labs, or are there real >world customers asking about this support? We have real world customers and most of us vendors are shipping products now, I predict all will be by 2001. Note IBM shipped the first product for IPv6. >5. When we add support for ipv6 to VSE, how soon will it be a real >requirement? 1 year, 2 years, more? Sorry been about 19 years since I hacked on SNA, VTAM, MVS, VM370, et al I can't answer your question. I can point you to an industry you can check out and may have contacts at where IP with this environment is very prominent Auto Industry in Detroit and also those Research Scientists (GM, Ford, Chrysler, et al). >6. Those of you that have implemented the new layer, how stable are you >finding things? High degree of confidence and performance maintained which was a lot of the effort from a "product" perspective. >7. I see that Microsoft has provided support for ipv6 in Windows 2000, but >why haven't they simply included it into the operating system? Are there that >many issues that are causing changes, or is it that its difficult for end >users to administer? I will let our Microsoft colleagues answer that on this list if they so desire. >These are the types of questions I'm looking for answers about. There is a very key point to IPv6 development and the business and marketing strategy. Do not think IPv6 Migration and Transition, think IPv6/IPv4 "product" Integration and Coexistence. Or from a business perspective IPv6 does not replace IPv4 but extends its capabilities and evolves IP in general. >.Please forgive me for being late in the game. But that does not mean we are >.not a serious development house, with serious concerns. Nothing to forgive. But you are behind if you are just starting many of the vendors on this list have been at this for 6 years as early implementors. regards, /jim From hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com Tue Jun 13 14:52:48 2000 From: hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com (hasan.ali@uk.pwcglobal.com) Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 14:52:48 +0100 Subject: Question about the future Message-ID: <802568FD.004C7248.00@uk-emamta003.uk.pw.com> Memo from Hasan Ali of PricewaterhouseCoopers -------------------- Start of message text -------------------- No, but IBM mainframes have been around for a very long time - many as you know - still in production and (like e.g. OpenVMS systems) there are some on the (public) Internet. Be worthwhile for them to have an IPV6 stack available... ...Although how long has IPV4 been available for IBM mainframes? Six years? SNA gateways - needed until fairly recently I seem to recall.. (Do you remember them - huge damn cables connected directly to the IBM boxes...) The number of relieved mainframes guys - "look you don't need to retire us - we can talk to the rest of the network, honest!!" Do you know how many of these things are still out there?! Also how many in active production (the back end of all sorts of web sites...) (Might throw in a line about how robust this "legacy" technology is... But will assume that's known...) Regards, Hasan Peter Bunclark on 13/06/2000 09:12:24 To: JohnRankin@aol.com cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: Question about the future Are you expecting IBM Mainframes to be able to communicate to the billions of next-generation phones, TVs, refrigeraters etc etc that can't possibly fit into IPv4 address space and which will need IPv6's QOS, encryption, flow control and so on? Pete. On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 JohnRankin@aol.com wrote: > Hello everyone, > > I am the director of development for one of the IBM Mainframe TCP/IP > stacks. Up to this point we have not implemented IP version 6, and none of > our customers have even asked us for this support. I guess, I'm wondering if > this support will still be necessary. So I thought I would solicit opinions. > > John Rankin > --------------------- End of message text -------------------- The principal place of business of PricewaterhouseCoopers and its associate partnerships is 1 Embankment Place, London WC2N 6NN where lists of the partners' names are available for inspection. All partners in the associate partnerships are authorised to conduct business as agents of, and all contracts for services to clients are with, PricewaterhouseCoopers. The UK firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers is authorised by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales to carry on investment business. PricewaterhouseCoopers is a member of the world-wide PricewaterhouseCoopers organisation. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From deering@cisco.com Fri Jun 16 05:34:11 2000 From: deering@cisco.com (Steve Deering) Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:34:11 -0700 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: <200006160246.WAA0000826327@anw.zk3.dec.com> References: <200006160246.WAA0000826327@anw.zk3.dec.com> Message-ID: At 10:46 PM -0400 6/15/00, Jim Bound wrote: >Note IBM shipped the first product for IPv6. Actually, I think Telebit in Denmark has that honour. Steve From bound@zk3.dec.com Fri Jun 16 05:54:15 2000 From: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 00:54:15 -0400 Subject: Question about the future In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2000 21:34:11 PDT." Message-ID: <200006160454.AAA0000840780@anw.zk3.dec.com> >At 10:46 PM -0400 6/15/00, Jim Bound wrote: >>Note IBM shipped the first product for IPv6. > >Actually, I think Telebit in Denmark has that honour. yes that is true. I was showing my UNIX bias :---).... thanks /jim From tribble@gedankenpolizei.de Sat Jun 17 15:29:44 2000 From: tribble@gedankenpolizei.de (Martin Steldinger) Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 16:29:44 +0200 (CEST) Subject: User ipv6 addresses/tunnels In-Reply-To: <4.3.1.2.20000611211347.00b64158@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: Hi! > >How do I go about finding a place to support a 'user' connection to the > >6bone? Every place I've tried so far have said they only provide > > Try the tunnel server at They don't provide static ipv6 adresses. So where i could get a static adress/range? cu. From Jan H. van Gils" Hi, Thanks for reading. I am trying to connect to the 6bone with a Linux distribution. I have the following problem. I compiled the inet6-apps-0.36 and the net-tools-1.54 now I have the following problem. - ping -a inet6 ping: icmp6: unknown protocol ping: no IP version 4 or 6 addresses available. Here is my rc.inet6 script : ---- begin script ---- #!/bin/bash # exec >/dev/console exec /dev/console PATH=/usr/inet6/bin:/usr/inet6/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/etc:/usr/bin:/ bin: /etc; export PATH # Load IPv6 module modprobe ipv6 # Your IPv6 prefix # Full Prefix 3FFE:2500:0304::/48 PREFIX=3FFE:2500:0304 # The host-part of the IPv6 address for this machine ADDRESS=1 # The IPv4 address of the far side of your tunnel TUNNEL=212.136.33.34 echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/autoconf echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/accept_ra echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/accept_redirects echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/forwarding echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv6/conf/all/router_solicitations /sbin/ifconfig eth0 add $PREFIX::$ADDRESS/64 /sbin/route -A inet6 add $PREFIX::0/64 dev eth0 /sbin/ifconfig sit0 up tunnel ::$TUNNEL /sbin/ifconfig sit1 up /sbin/route -A inet6 add 3ffe::0/15 gw fe80::$TUNNEL dev sit1 /usr/inet6/sbin/radvd & ---- end script ---- man icmp6 No manual entry for icmp6 man icmpv6 That works ok. So I am wondering what should the icmp version be : icmp6 or icmpv6 ? Is this a "bug" and is there patch our am I using the wrong combination of inet6-apps and net-tools. Any help would be welcome Jan ---- With regards Jan H. van Gils Breda, Netherlands Internet e-mail address janvg@knoware.nl Internet web-page http://www.knoware.nl/users/janvg/ From tribble@gedankenpolizei.de Mon Jun 19 14:53:58 2000 From: tribble@gedankenpolizei.de (Martin Steldinger) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 15:53:58 +0200 (CEST) Subject: User ipv6 addresses/tunnels In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi! > > They don't provide static ipv6 adresses. So where i could get a static > > adress/range? > Your email address indicates a german host. In germany JOIN is the main > tunnel server for the 6bone, so just contact the JOIN team (email below) > and we will see what we can do :) Hmm... naja, der Host steht schon in USA, genauer gesagt in San Francisco, insofern vielleicht doch ein etwas langer Weg.. es hat sich noch einer gemeldet, der ist nur 120ms/20hops entfernt, insofern werd ich eher den Menschen ansprechen .. aber danke :) cu. -- def. Firewall: Keine Ahnung, ist mir aber auch Wurst. Ich installiere da halt einen Router mit Paketfilter fuer eingehende TCP-Verbindungen und gehe dann weg. Wenn es dann jemand Firewall oder Wuerstchenbude nennt, ist das nicht mein Problem. (Hans, congress-ml) From aa@pure.boza.org Mon Jun 19 17:47:12 2000 From: aa@pure.boza.org (atanas argirov) Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 18:47:12 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Question about ICMP6 versus ICMPv6 In-Reply-To: <002901bfd9d7$48ffe870$2865f7c2@borg> Message-ID: On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Jan H. van Gils wrote: [...] > following problem. > > - ping -a inet6 > ping: icmp6: unknown protocol > ping: no IP version 4 or 6 addresses available. > Dear Jan, ipv6 41 IPV6 ipv6-route 43 IPv6-Route ipv6-frag 44 IPv6-Frag ipv6-crypt 50 IPv6-Crypt ipv6-auth 51 IPv6-Auth ipv6-icmp 58 IPv6-ICMP ipv6-nonxt 59 IPv6-NoNxt ipv6-opts 60 IPv6-Opts Do you have these entries in your /etc/protocols? Cheers, atanas argirov From jang@sps.nl Tue Jun 20 15:40:11 2000 From: jang@sps.nl (Gils van, Jan) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:40:11 +0200 Subject: Compiling IPv6 related software with Linux, help wanted Message-ID: Hi, Thanks for reading. At the moment I am trying to compile some IPv6 related tools with Linux as Operating System. Linux Kernel I am using is 2.2.14 (The generic kernel from Caldera OpenSystems eServer 2.3) The tunnel is working great via www.freenet6.net, a ping is no problem. But now some additional software for example libpcap-0.4a6+ipv6-1 compiled ok tcpdump-3.4a6+ipv6-1 did not compile (header and include problems) traceroute-1.4a5+ipv6-1 did not compile (header and include problems) Is there anybody with the same problem and can give me hint on how to move on With regards Jan H. van Gils From E.B.M.vanTilborg@kpn.com Tue Jun 20 17:22:57 2000 From: E.B.M.vanTilborg@kpn.com (Tilborg, E.B.M. van) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:22:57 +0100 Subject: Tunnel broker Message-ID: <59063B5B4D98D311BC0D0001FA7E452202C432F8@l04.research.kpn.com> Hello, I have a question regarding the tunnelbroker software of CSELT. I have some problems with the installation. It seems that data that I insert via the AdminTB.pl is not entered in the database. I also cannot configure what OS I am using. Are there more people that have had this problem (or other problems regarding the installation)? Help or advice is very welcome. Thanks in advance! Regards, Edith van Tilborg ------------------------------------------------------- KPN Research Department Middleware Internet Technologies Room LE 128 Postbus 421, 2260 AK Leidschendam The Netherlands tel.: (31)70 - 3323727 fax.: (31)70 -3326477 From zszhang@krdl.org.sg Tue Jun 20 16:49:26 2000 From: zszhang@krdl.org.sg (Zhang Zhi Shou) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:49:26 +0800 (SGT) Subject: setup ipv6 router Message-ID: Hi, Now I would like to setup a software router (linux) that can support both IPv4 and IPv6 routing. Can you give me some information or URL to me? Thanks zhishou From Stefan.Gasteiger@Gendorf.de Fri Jun 23 07:13:59 2000 From: Stefan.Gasteiger@Gendorf.de (Stefan.Gasteiger@Gendorf.de) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 08:13:59 +0200 Subject: setup ipv6 router Message-ID: <4185051FE012D411A98B0008C7337A2E65184A@ATLANTIS> > -----Original Message----- > From: Zhang Zhi Shou [mailto:zszhang@krdl.org.sg] > Subject: setup ipv6 router > > Now I would like to setup a software router (linux) that can > support both > IPv4 and IPv6 routing. Can you give me some information or URL to me? http://www.zebra.org Kind regards, Stefan Gasteiger SG5599-RIPE I+K Betrieb (zertifiziert nach DIN EN ISO 9001) InfraServ Gendorf Tel.: +49 8679 7 5599 Fax: +49 8679 7 39 5599 Mobiltel.: +49 172 8649205 E-Mail: Stefan.Gasteiger@gendorf.de From richdr@microsoft.com Mon Jun 26 19:32:54 2000 From: richdr@microsoft.com (Richard Draves) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:32:54 -0700 Subject: A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION Message-ID: <4D0A23B3F74DD111ACCD00805F31D810249B8D6F@RED-MSG-50> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Well, everything looks OK in your configuration. I'm sorry to say that I don't have a good idea why "ping 131.107.65.121" works well but "ping6 ::131.107.65.121" is unreliable. My only guess is that something in your network (maybe the firewall?) is handling encapsulated IPv6 packets in a slow path and so they get a higher drop rate. Rich -----Original Message----- From: sunym [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:03 PM To: Richard Draves Cc: 6BONE@ISI.EDU Subject: A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION Please open the attachment,thank you! ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Draves To: 'sunym' Cc: Brian Zill Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:06 PM Subject: RE: A TYRO'S QUESTION Let me clarify this. If you run ping 131.107.65.121 then it works great. But if you try ping6 ::131.107.65.121 then you get some replies but most pings time out? Can you send us a) Information about your hardware configuration. b) Information about your network topology? How are you connected to the internet? c) The output of "ipv6 if" and "ipv6 rt". Thanks, Rich -----Original Message----- From: sunym [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:27 AM To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: A TYRO'S QUESTION I AM A CHINESE STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO CONNECT WITH 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I TYPE " PING6 ::131.107.65.121" THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST TIMMED OUT" AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING 131.107.65.121" ,THE RESULT IS NORMAL.WHY? ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well,=20 everything looks OK in your configuration. I'm sorry to say that I = don't have a=20 good idea why "ping 131.107.65.121" works well but "ping6 = ::131.107.65.121" is=20 unreliable. My only guess is that something in your network (maybe the=20 firewall?) is handling encapsulated IPv6 packets in a slow path and so = they get=20 a higher drop rate.
 
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: sunym=20 [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn]
Sent: Sunday, June 25, = 2000 8:03=20 PM
To: Richard Draves
Cc: = 6BONE@ISI.EDU
Subject:=20 A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION

Please open the attachment,thank = you!
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Richard=20 Draves
To: 'sunym'
Sent: Tuesday, June = 06, 2000 10:06=20 PM
Subject: RE: A TYRO'S = QUESTION

Let me clarify this. If you = run
    ping=20 131.107.65.121
then it works great.
But if you try
    ping6=20 ::131.107.65.121
then you get some replies but most pings = time=20 out?
 
Can you send us
a)=20 Information about your hardware configuration.
b)=20 Information about your network topology? How are you connected to = the=20 internet?
c)=20 The output of "ipv6 if" and "ipv6 rt".
 
Thanks,
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: sunym=20 [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn]
Sent: Tuesday, June = 06, 2000=20 4:27 AM
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: A TYRO'S=20 QUESTION

     I AM A = CHINESE=20 STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO = CONNECT WITH=20 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I = TYPE=20
" PING6 = ::131.107.65.121"
THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST = TIMMED OUT"=20 AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING = 131.107.65.121"=20 ,THE RESULT IS=20 NORMAL.WHY?
 ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180-- From richdr@microsoft.com Mon Jun 26 19:32:54 2000 From: richdr@microsoft.com (Richard Draves) Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 11:32:54 -0700 Subject: A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION Message-ID: <4D0A23B3F74DD111ACCD00805F31D810249B8D6F@RED-MSG-50> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Well, everything looks OK in your configuration. I'm sorry to say that I don't have a good idea why "ping 131.107.65.121" works well but "ping6 ::131.107.65.121" is unreliable. My only guess is that something in your network (maybe the firewall?) is handling encapsulated IPv6 packets in a slow path and so they get a higher drop rate. Rich -----Original Message----- From: sunym [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn] Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2000 8:03 PM To: Richard Draves Cc: 6BONE@ISI.EDU Subject: A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION Please open the attachment,thank you! ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Draves To: 'sunym' Cc: Brian Zill Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:06 PM Subject: RE: A TYRO'S QUESTION Let me clarify this. If you run ping 131.107.65.121 then it works great. But if you try ping6 ::131.107.65.121 then you get some replies but most pings time out? Can you send us a) Information about your hardware configuration. b) Information about your network topology? How are you connected to the internet? c) The output of "ipv6 if" and "ipv6 rt". Thanks, Rich -----Original Message----- From: sunym [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 4:27 AM To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: A TYRO'S QUESTION I AM A CHINESE STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO CONNECT WITH 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I TYPE " PING6 ::131.107.65.121" THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST TIMMED OUT" AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING 131.107.65.121" ,THE RESULT IS NORMAL.WHY? ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well,=20 everything looks OK in your configuration. I'm sorry to say that I = don't have a=20 good idea why "ping 131.107.65.121" works well but "ping6 = ::131.107.65.121" is=20 unreliable. My only guess is that something in your network (maybe the=20 firewall?) is handling encapsulated IPv6 packets in a slow path and so = they get=20 a higher drop rate.
 
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: sunym=20 [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn]
Sent: Sunday, June 25, = 2000 8:03=20 PM
To: Richard Draves
Cc: = 6BONE@ISI.EDU
Subject:=20 A TYRO'S CONFIGURATION INFORMATION

Please open the attachment,thank = you!
 
 
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Richard=20 Draves
To: 'sunym'
Sent: Tuesday, June = 06, 2000 10:06=20 PM
Subject: RE: A TYRO'S = QUESTION

Let me clarify this. If you = run
    ping=20 131.107.65.121
then it works great.
But if you try
    ping6=20 ::131.107.65.121
then you get some replies but most pings = time=20 out?
 
Can you send us
a)=20 Information about your hardware configuration.
b)=20 Information about your network topology? How are you connected to = the=20 internet?
c)=20 The output of "ipv6 if" and "ipv6 rt".
 
Thanks,
Rich
-----Original Message-----
From: sunym=20 [mailto:sunym@NJUST0.njust.edu.cn]
Sent: Tuesday, June = 06, 2000=20 4:27 AM
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: A TYRO'S=20 QUESTION

     I AM A = CHINESE=20 STUDENT,NOW,I HAVE INSTALLED WINDOWS2000 AND BUILD A IPV6 STACK .USING " IPV6 "COMMAND,I TRY TO = CONNECT WITH=20 6TO4(::131.107.65.121).WHEN I HAVE FINISHED ALL THE COMMAND ,I = TYPE=20
" PING6 = ::131.107.65.121"
THE RESULT IS,TOO MUCH "REQUEST = TIMMED OUT"=20 AND SHOW REPLY ONCE IN A WHILE,HOWEVER,IF I TYPE "PING = 131.107.65.121"=20 ,THE RESULT IS=20 NORMAL.WHY?
 ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFDF9C.F15A9180-- From ksbn@kt.co.kr Tue Jun 27 01:24:19 2000 From: ksbn@kt.co.kr (ksb) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:24:19 +0900 Subject: DNSv6 Message-ID: <3957F433.7A4854@kt.co.kr> How are you? I hope to make DNS using Solaris7. (SUN60) Will you give me some information. This is the first time for me to install IPv4/IPv6 DNS. Thanks. ksb -- Kim, Sahng-Beom / Korea Telecom TEL : +82-42-870-8322 FAX : +82-42-870-8279 E-mail : ksbn@kt.co.kr -- From Robbie_harrell@INS.COM Tue Jun 27 15:59:57 2000 From: Robbie_harrell@INS.COM (Robbie_harrell@INS.COM) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 09:59:57 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <013201bfe048$5c03c000$bd59a4d0@ins.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_012F_01BFE01E.730F0C70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable unsubscribe ------=_NextPart_000_012F_01BFE01E.730F0C70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
unsubscribe
------=_NextPart_000_012F_01BFE01E.730F0C70-- From Robbie_harrell@INS.COM Tue Jun 27 16:00:17 2000 From: Robbie_harrell@INS.COM (Robbie_harrell@INS.COM) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:00:17 -0500 Subject: remove Message-ID: <013b01bfe048$68371250$bd59a4d0@ins.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0138_01BFE01E.7F440C70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable remove ------=_NextPart_000_0138_01BFE01E.7F440C70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
remove
------=_NextPart_000_0138_01BFE01E.7F440C70-- From gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx Tue Jun 27 20:18:30 2000 From: gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx (Gabriela A. Campos) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:18:30 -0500 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <3958FE05.2BF71695@campus.cem.itesm.mx> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------6E99EEDBC7ECFDDB67298014 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit unsubscribe --------------6E99EEDBC7ECFDDB67298014 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="gcampos.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Gabriela A. Campos Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gcampos.vcf" begin:vcard n:Campos G.;Gabriela A. tel;fax:(52)5864-5492 tel;work:(52)5864-5458 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.cem.itesm.mx adr:;;;Atizapán de Zaragoza;Edo. de México;52926;México version:2.1 email;internet:gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx title:ITESM Estado de México fn:M. en C. Gabriela A. Campos G. end:vcard --------------6E99EEDBC7ECFDDB67298014-- From gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx Tue Jun 27 20:19:02 2000 From: gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx (Gabriela A. Campos) Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 14:19:02 -0500 Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <3958FE25.8399963F@campus.cem.itesm.mx> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------FC2F89B97F7119C9AC8E2DA6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit remove --------------FC2F89B97F7119C9AC8E2DA6 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="gcampos.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Gabriela A. Campos Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gcampos.vcf" begin:vcard n:Campos G.;Gabriela A. tel;fax:(52)5864-5492 tel;work:(52)5864-5458 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.cem.itesm.mx adr:;;;Atizapán de Zaragoza;Edo. de México;52926;México version:2.1 email;internet:gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx title:ITESM Estado de México fn:M. en C. Gabriela A. Campos G. end:vcard --------------FC2F89B97F7119C9AC8E2DA6-- From peilei@MIT.EDU Thu Jun 29 14:05:42 2000 From: peilei@MIT.EDU (Peilei Fan) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 09:05:42 -0400 Subject: ipv6 linux (setup local ip6 address) Message-ID: <200006291305.JAA26695@nerd-xing.mit.edu> Hello there, I need some help from someone who has experience of setting up ipv6 in linux. Here I am doing a project that need several local linux machine sending each other ipv6 packets. I followed Peter's (seems the most popular ipv6 in linux how to website) GUIDE to recompile the ipv6 kernel and installed the necessary applications. For instance, when I try to ping6 my machine ::1 and fe80::8653:07a0 (the ipv6 address it automatically generate according to my eth0 address), it works fine. However,... Here are the questions: 1. when I try to do "ifconfig eth0 inet6 fec0:0:0:1:2c0:6cff:fe00:f043" so that I can set it as some local ipv6 address, it gives the msg "don't know how to set add for family 10" Do you know what will be the reason? Do you know how to configure your eth interface in ipv6 (set up local ip6 address, subnet mask, etc)? 2. Also, do you refer some good website that give you instructions on ipv6 setup in linux or how to obtain an ipv6 static address? I will really appreciate your help. Best wishes, Peilei From wmaton@ryouko.dgim.crc.ca Thu Jun 29 18:01:42 2000 From: wmaton@ryouko.dgim.crc.ca (William F. Maton) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 13:01:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: ipv6 linux (setup local ip6 address) In-Reply-To: <200006291305.JAA26695@nerd-xing.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, Peilei Fan wrote: > Here are the questions: > > 1. when I try to do "ifconfig eth0 inet6 fec0:0:0:1:2c0:6cff:fe00:f043" so > that I can set it as some local ipv6 address, it gives the msg "don't know > how to set add for family 10" Do you know what will be the reason? Do you > know how to configure your eth interface in ipv6 (set up local ip6 address, subnet mask, etc)? Don't do that! :-) See below... > 2. Also, do you refer some good website that give you instructions on ipv6 > setup in linux or how to obtain an ipv6 static address? http://www.debian.org/~csmall/ipv6/setup.html Try that site. The instructions are generic enough to work on linux in general. ifconfig isn't as reliable to use as 'ip' is. > Peilei wfms From Stan J creature's user" Does anyone know how to unscubscribe from the 6bone list? Please help. stan@creature.telecom.ou.edu From baixauli@mat.upc.es Fri Jun 30 11:45:11 2000 From: baixauli@mat.upc.es (Julio Baixauli) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 12:45:11 +0200 Subject: inet_ntoa Message-ID: <395C7A37.EFE1BFEC@mat.upc.es> Hello! Is there any function that works as 'char *inet_ntoa(struct in_addr in);' but with IPv6 addresses (struct in6_addr)? (I'm interested in Linux version) Thank you. Bye! -- ******************************************** Julio Baixauli Garreta baixauli@mat.upc.es ********************************************