From bmanning@ISI.EDU Mon Apr 1 23:17:45 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 15:17:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: rough cut Message-ID: <200204012317.g31NHj817074@boreas.isi.edu> Thanks to Hideaki Imaizumi < hiddy@ISI.EDU > we have the start of something that might be useful over time. http://www.ep.net/ipv6bgp/prefix6.html comments please. -- "When in doubt, Twirl..." -anon From jorgen@hovland.cx Tue Apr 2 09:03:04 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 11:03:04 +0200 Subject: rough cut References: <200204012317.g31NHj817074@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: <002701c1da25$32d21b40$0200000a@t34> I think it will be very interesting to have. For instance... During the nimda (and the rest of the mailviruses) season last year, you could _see_ the differences on the ripe ipv4 ASN prefix withdrawn graph statistics. Joergen Hovland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Manning" To: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Cc: "Bill Manning" ; "Hideaki Imaizumi" Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 1:17 AM Subject: rough cut > Thanks to Hideaki Imaizumi < hiddy@ISI.EDU > we have the start of something > that might be useful over time. > > > http://www.ep.net/ipv6bgp/prefix6.html > > > comments please. > > -- > "When in doubt, Twirl..." -anon > From Jan Oravec Tue Apr 2 10:14:50 2002 From: Jan Oravec (Jan Oravec) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 12:14:50 +0200 Subject: IOS next-hop trouble In-Reply-To: References: <20020329064009.GA17100@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: <20020402101450.GA30019@hades.xs26.net> On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:38:28AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Pim van Pelt wrote: > > Dear admin friends, > > > > Recently I engaged in another IPv6 adventure at some ISP. We are now > > running IOS 12.2-8.5.T on a c7206VXR. > > > > The logs state: > > Mar 28 22:47:36 fe2-0.4.sara.ams-ix.network.bit.nl 2288: 3d12h: > > %BGP-6-NEXTHOP: Invalid next hop (0.0.0.0) received from > > 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:1: martian next hop > > > > for our peerings the AMS-IX. How can I solve this. Clearly IPv6 > > BGP has nothing to do with the IPv4 nexthop so the Juniper at :3265:1 > > leaves it empty. Why does my box complain ? > > Are you peering with some box running Zebra? I noticed this happened with > zebra when they didn't run 'zebra -d' before starting 'bgpd -d'. The bug has been fixed several months ago. zebra-xs26 (http://www.xs26.net/zebra) has bugfix included, I believe Kunihiro applied the patch to official zebra CVS. -- Jan Oravec project coordinator XS26 - 'Access to IPv6' http://www.xs26.net jan.oravec@xs26.net From mclin@sinica.edu.tw Tue Apr 2 13:35:39 2002 From: mclin@sinica.edu.tw (Ethern Lin) Date: Tue, 2 Apr 2002 21:35:39 +0800 Subject: IOS next-hop trouble References: <20020329064009.GA17100@bfib.colo.bit.nl> <20020402101450.GA30019@hades.xs26.net> Message-ID: <00cd01c1da4b$4d704410$b8016d8c@sinica.edu.tw> Dear Pekka, I have an dirty method to solve this. You can use route-map in BGP route out. Like below: neighbor 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:2 route-map ToAMXIX out route-map ToAMXIX permit 10 set ip next-hop ##your router ipv4 ip## ! Maybe work in your system. cheers, Ethern ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jan Oravec" To: "Pekka Savola" Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:14 PM Subject: Re: IOS next-hop trouble > On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:38:28AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Pim van Pelt wrote: > > > Dear admin friends, > > > > > > Recently I engaged in another IPv6 adventure at some ISP. We are now > > > running IOS 12.2-8.5.T on a c7206VXR. > > > > > > The logs state: > > > Mar 28 22:47:36 fe2-0.4.sara.ams-ix.network.bit.nl 2288: 3d12h: > > > %BGP-6-NEXTHOP: Invalid next hop (0.0.0.0) received from > > > 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:1: martian next hop > > > > > > for our peerings the AMS-IX. How can I solve this. Clearly IPv6 > > > BGP has nothing to do with the IPv4 nexthop so the Juniper at :3265:1 > > > leaves it empty. Why does my box complain ? > > > > Are you peering with some box running Zebra? I noticed this happened with > > zebra when they didn't run 'zebra -d' before starting 'bgpd -d'. > > The bug has been fixed several months ago. zebra-xs26 (http://www.xs26.net/zebra) has bugfix included, I believe Kunihiro applied the patch to official zebra CVS. > > -- > Jan Oravec > project coordinator > XS26 - 'Access to IPv6' > http://www.xs26.net > jan.oravec@xs26.net > From pim@ipng.nl Wed Apr 3 07:08:12 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 09:08:12 +0200 Subject: IOS next-hop trouble In-Reply-To: <00cd01c1da4b$4d704410$b8016d8c@sinica.edu.tw> References: <20020329064009.GA17100@bfib.colo.bit.nl> <20020402101450.GA30019@hades.xs26.net> <00cd01c1da4b$4d704410$b8016d8c@sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <20020403070812.GB2724@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Tue, Apr 02, 2002 at 09:35:39PM +0800, Ethern Lin wrote: | Dear Pekka, | | I have an dirty method to solve this. You can use route-map in | BGP route out. Like below: | | neighbor 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:2 route-map ToAMXIX out | | route-map ToAMXIX permit 10 | set ip next-hop ##your router ipv4 ip## | ! | | Maybe work in your system. Ethern, Thans for the remark, however I do not think it helps much. It is not the Cisco who is announcing 0.0.0.0 as nexthop, but the Juniper. So in fact, the correct thing would be that AS3265 fixes his sessions with others to announce no-nexthop for IPv4 (or his shared medium address if that fails). I spoke with Juniper folk at a meeting yesterday and it has been fixed in 5.2, which the above 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:1 router does not run (yet). I am closing this matter as it appears to be a known bug. groet, Pim | | cheers, | | Ethern | | | ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Jan Oravec" | To: "Pekka Savola" | Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> | Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 6:14 PM | Subject: Re: IOS next-hop trouble | | | > On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 10:38:28AM +0200, Pekka Savola wrote: | > > On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Pim van Pelt wrote: | > > > Dear admin friends, | > > > | > > > Recently I engaged in another IPv6 adventure at some ISP. We are now | > > > running IOS 12.2-8.5.T on a c7206VXR. | > > > | > > > The logs state: | > > > Mar 28 22:47:36 fe2-0.4.sara.ams-ix.network.bit.nl 2288: 3d12h: | > > > %BGP-6-NEXTHOP: Invalid next hop (0.0.0.0) received from | > > > 2001:7F8:1::A500:3265:1: martian next hop | > > > | > > > for our peerings the AMS-IX. How can I solve this. Clearly IPv6 | > > > BGP has nothing to do with the IPv4 nexthop so the Juniper at :3265:1 | > > > leaves it empty. Why does my box complain ? | > > | > > Are you peering with some box running Zebra? I noticed this happened | with | > > zebra when they didn't run 'zebra -d' before starting 'bgpd -d'. | > | > The bug has been fixed several months ago. zebra-xs26 | (http://www.xs26.net/zebra) has bugfix included, I believe Kunihiro applied | the patch to official zebra CVS. | > | > -- | > Jan Oravec | > project coordinator | > XS26 - 'Access to IPv6' | > http://www.xs26.net | > jan.oravec@xs26.net | > | -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp Thu Apr 4 01:06:33 2002 From: hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp (Hideaki Imaizumi) Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 10:06:33 +0900 (JST) Subject: IPv6 BGP Perspectve In-Reply-To: <200204012317.g31NHj817074@boreas.isi.edu> References: <200204012317.g31NHj817074@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: <20020404100633I.hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp> Hi folks, This site is still under construct but I hope this would be usesul for you. http://www.ep.net/bgp-ipv6 'http://www.ep.net/ipv6bgp' will be removed. best regards, Hideaki Imaizumi From: Bill Manning Subject: rough cut Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 15:17:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <200204012317.g31NHj817074@boreas.isi.edu> bmanning> Thanks to Hideaki Imaizumi < hiddy@ISI.EDU > we have the start of something bmanning> that might be useful over time. bmanning> bmanning> bmanning> http://www.ep.net/ipv6bgp/prefix6.html bmanning> bmanning> bmanning> comments please. bmanning> bmanning> -- bmanning> "When in doubt, Twirl..." -anon bmanning> From tony@lava.net Thu Apr 4 21:29:25 2002 From: tony@lava.net (Antonio Querubin) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 11:29:25 -1000 (HST) Subject: deployment/engineering plan for acquiring production pTLA Message-ID: For those of you who have successfully acquired production IPv6 address space from ARIN, could you contact me off-list please? I'd like to get an idea of what others have produced to satisfy ARIN's requirement for a deployment or engineering plan. From Merlin" Does one apply for reverse mapping somewhere - is it just "done"? - is it not official yet? - is the 2002 just temporary? I'm probably not close to being ready to go official yet, but soon, and a person who has been very kind in helping me out, advises me of the following; >By the way, I have no idea who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse >DNS, but you probably do want to get all of >0.6.1.0.b.c.2.0.0.2.ip6.{int,arpa} delegated to your servers (that >would correspond to your IPv4 203.1.96.0/24). Can someone who knows how all this works together take a moment to advise me please? Thank you Robert Chalmers Quantum Radio --- Quantum Radio: World Music with a difference. http://quantum-radio.net/ Now Playing: Duc Tranh - Cay Truc Xinh From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 5 04:30:26 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 13:30:26 +0900 Subject: 6bone meeting @ IETF53 In-Reply-To: michel's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 15:40:52 PST. <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C44C@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <3077.1017981026@itojun.org> are there any minutes/memo/whatever available for IETF53 6bone meeting? i was unable to participate due to conflicting meeting. itojun From arun.mahabier@cmg.nl Fri Apr 5 06:27:02 2002 From: arun.mahabier@cmg.nl (Arun Mahabier) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 08:27:02 +0200 Subject: remove Message-ID: remove From pekkas@netcore.fi Fri Apr 5 07:59:14 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 10:59:14 +0300 (EEST) Subject: Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ? In-Reply-To: <00c801c1dc24$e3239d60$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Merlin wrote: > Does one apply for reverse mapping somewhere - is it just "done"? - is it not official yet? - is the 2002 just > temporary? > > I'm probably not close to being ready to go official yet, but soon, and a person who has been very kind in helping me > out, advises me of the following; > > >By the way, I have no idea who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse > >DNS, but you probably do want to get all of > >0.6.1.0.b.c.2.0.0.2.ip6.{int,arpa} delegated to your servers (that > >would correspond to your IPv4 203.1.96.0/24). > > Can someone who knows how all this works together take a moment to advise me please? This is still an open issue. See: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ngtrans-6to4-dns-00.txt and e.g. dnsext minutes/presentations for IETF53. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From jeroen@unfix.org Fri Apr 5 10:50:28 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 12:50:28 +0200 Subject: Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001501c1dc8f$b37f6830$534510ac@cyan> Pekka Savola wrote: > On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Merlin wrote: > > Does one apply for reverse mapping somewhere - is it just "done"? - is it not official yet? - is the 2002 just > > temporary? > > > > I'm probably not close to being ready to go official yet, > but soon, and a person who has been very kind in helping me > > out, advises me of the following; > > > > >By the way, I have no idea who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse > > >DNS, but you probably do want to get all of > > >0.6.1.0.b.c.2.0.0.2.ip6.{int,arpa} delegated to your servers (that > > >would correspond to your IPv4 203.1.96.0/24). > > > > Can someone who knows how all this works together take a moment to advise me please? > > This is still an open issue. See: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ngtrans-6to4-dns-00.txt > >and e.g. dnsext minutes/presentations for IETF53. Also 6to4 is a _transistion_ method... so I wonder why somebody wants to get their company/organisation relying on something that will go away in the long run, which could take it's time ofcourse. You'd still be better off getting some real IPv6 space from your upstreams. 6to4 is perfect though, for the time when your upstreams are still in neverneverland ;) And renumbering a network with IPv6 is a piece of cake, but why make the effort for reversing 6to4 then in the first place. Greets, Jeroen From fink@es.net Fri Apr 5 14:35:15 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2002 06:35:15 -0800 Subject: 6bone meeting @ IETF53 In-Reply-To: <3077.1017981026@itojun.org> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020405055932.0260fec8@imap2.es.net> Itojun, At 01:30 PM 4/5/2002 +0900, itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > are there any minutes/memo/whatever available for IETF53 6bone > meeting? > i was unable to participate due to conflicting meeting. I was just getting to them. I have placed the 3 presentations and a "shell" minutes online at: and will fill in the minutes with comments from my discussion next week sometime. Thanks for bugging me. My new home is back under construction as the weather has changed to springtime, so I'm busy working on it (more fun than work work :-) Bob From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Fri Apr 5 16:00:24 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 08:00:24 -0800 Subject: Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ? Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C4E2@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Jeroen, > Jeroen Massar wrote: > Also 6to4 is a _transistion_ method... so I wonder why > somebody wants to get their company/organisation relying > on something that will go away in the long run, which could > take it's time ofcourse. The time frame we are looking at here is ten years or more, so it is perfectly legitimate to want reverse lookup for 6to4 addresses for the time being. > You'd still be better off getting some real IPv6 space from > your upstreams. Yes, but sometimes, it is not available. Most of the time, these days. It is sad to say, bit in terms of performance 6to4 is better than regular tunnels and will be used because of this. > And renumbering a network with IPv6 is a piece of cake This is simply not true. In the 6bone meeting in Minneapolis, the renumbering of /24 and /28 pTLAs was discussed, and several people contributed that renumbering anything bigger that a dial-up connection is not a piece of cake. Michel From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Fri Apr 5 17:30:36 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 19:30:36 +0200 Subject: New pTLA /32 and prefix-list Message-ID: <011901c1dcc7$9925d2c0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> Hello all, I remind you: new pTLA are now /32 in 3ffe:4000::/18 (check mailing-list archives for more informations about this). Many peoples have forgot the creation of this new pTLA format (/32) for all new pTLA request and don't have updated the prefix-list of their routers because new pTLAs (TELEPAC and ANSNET for the moment) aren't annonced and/or accessible on a lot of of network... TELEPAC don't annonce their pTLA but ASNET annonce it in good conditions from external. I have do all my tests with ANSNET's pTLA (3ffe:4001::/32) parcr2.fr.fastnetxp.net> traceroute6 3ffe:4001:: traceroute6 to 3ffe:4001:: (3ffe:4001::) from 3ffe:8271:201:2100::2, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 tun100-0-parcr1 81.213 ms 70.85 ms 76.991 ms 2 lavanet-gw-parcr1 351.365 ms 400.334 ms 327.774 ms 3 * * * 4 * * * parcr2.fr.fastnetxp.net> show ipv6 3ffe:4001::/32 6435 9264 3ffe:8271:201:2100::1 from 3ffe:8271:201:2100::1 (213.91.4.3) (fe80::d55b:403) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, internal, best Last update: Thu Apr 4 23:46:00 2002 parcr2.fr.fastnetxp.net> I have try many public traceroute6 gateway and looking-glass, a lot of people have the same problem. Don't forget to update your access-list if you filter bgp routes !!! You can use this prefix-list for accept only valid pTLA, subTLA and 6to4: ! ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in permit 3ffe::/18 ge 24 le 24 ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in permit 3ffe:4000::/18 ge 32 le 32 ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in permit 3ffe:8000::/17 ge 28 le 28 ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in permit 2001::/16 ge 35 le 35 ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in permit 2002::/16 ipv6 prefix-list peering-full-in deny 0::/0 ! Personnal stats: On 26 full bgp peering on parcr1.fr.fastnetxp.net: 14 peers (50%) annonces me the new (/32) pTLA ! 26 peers (100%) annonces me the old (/24 and /28) pTLA And a annonces can be good but a router after can filter... I wait your comments.... Think to new pTLA ! Best Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET From jeroen@unfix.org Sat Apr 6 00:19:43 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 02:19:43 +0200 Subject: Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ? In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C4E2@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <002f01c1dd00$ca66d580$420d640a@unfix.org> Michel Py [mailto:michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us] wrote: > > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > Also 6to4 is a _transistion_ method... so I wonder why > > somebody wants to get their company/organisation relying > > on something that will go away in the long run, which could > > take it's time ofcourse. > > The time frame we are looking at here is ten years or more, > so it is perfectly legitimate to want reverse lookup for 6to4 > addresses for the time being. "which could take it's time ofcourse." and which unfortunaly will be in the range 10 year period you mention :( Ofcourse it's perfectly 'legit' to have reverse lookup, it's even quite overseeable most of the time as IPv4 ranges can be whoised and are known where the end up at. > > You'd still be better off getting some real IPv6 space from > > your upstreams. > > Yes, but sometimes, it is not available. Most of the time, > these days. It is sad to say, bit in terms of performance > 6to4 is better than regular tunnels and will be used because of this. That's why it's one of the available transition methods. But IMHO *any* transition method should be avoided as much as possible. If it ain't possible too bad, use your favourite and possible transition method, but if you can get a native uplink... why not ? > > And renumbering a network with IPv6 is a piece of cake > > This is simply not true. In the 6bone meeting in Minneapolis, > the renumbering of /24 and /28 pTLAs was discussed, and > several people contributed that renumbering anything bigger > that a dial-up connection is not a piece of cake. Ofcourse if one sizes down renumbering isn't easy... But if you move from one /48 to another /48 it should be a piece of cake. The AMS-IX did it perfectly well last weeks. First the routers on where in 3FFE:3000::/64 (out of the /48) now they have moved to 2001:07F8:1::/64 (out of the /48). eg: 3ffe:3000::a500:8954:1 became 2001:7f8:1::a500:8954:1 And one can do that with almost a flip of the switch. It ofcourse comes down to a good numberplan and if one needs to scale down (/24 to /28) the numberplan shouldn't be completely filled up ofcourse, though sometimes that is quite unavoidable and indeed one will have a hard time sizing down. At least in theory it all should be much easier as IPv4 though. Don't know if there is something like this but maybe it's a good idea to create a document setting up some of the currently known scenario's which explain which problems can occur when renumbering. And ofcourse include a solution which explains how to avoid these problems. I only wanted to state the "if possible use native IPv6, not one of the transistional methods" ;) Greets, Jeroen From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Sat Apr 6 02:30:24 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 18:30:24 -0800 Subject: (6bone) renumbering Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF5A@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Jeroen, > Jeroen Massar wrote: > And one can do that with almost a flip of the switch. You have to explain me how you do that. I just looked at my home router and a single /48 block appears nine times in the config and related info such as tunnel addresses appears eight more times, so a total of _seventeen_ occurrences of addresses related to _one_ of my pTLAs, and again this is my home router with only one subnet, not a production one with long access-lists, DMZs and other stuff. What kind of software is it that can read a config, inventory what needs to be changed, change it, and not screw the pooch? | interface Loopback4046 | description loopback for viagenie block 1 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:4046::1/64 | | interface Ethernet0/1 | description Internal network 2 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:4046:1::1/64 3 | ipv6 nd prefix-advertisement 3FFE:B00:4046:1::/64 3600 3600 | | router bgp 23169 4 | network 3FFE:B00:4046::/64 5 | network 3FFE:B00:4046:1::/64 6 | aggregate-address 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 | 7 | ipv6 access-list IPV6-ACL-OUTSIDE-IN permit any 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 | | ipv6 prefix-list IPV6-PREFIX-LIST-VIAGENIE-BLOCK seq 5 permit 8 | 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 | | arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us - 209.233.126.65 - ASN 23169 9 | 3FFE:B00:4046::1 - 3ffe:8270:5::1 - 2002:D1E9:7E41::1 | | interface Tunnel4046 10 | description tunnel to Viagenie - endpoint 3ffe:b00:c18::8c 11 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:C18::8D/127 | | router bgp 23169 12 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C remote-as 10566 13 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C ebgp-multihop 99 14 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C update-source Tunnel4046 | address-family ipv6 15 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C activate 16 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C route-map ROUTE-MAP-VIAGENIE-OUT out | 17 | ipv6 access-list IPV6-ACL-OUTSIDE-IN permit any 3FFE:B00:C18::8D/128 > I only wanted to state the "if possible use native IPv6, not > one of the transitional methods" ;) Agree! Michel. From pim@ipng.nl Sat Apr 6 07:24:58 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 09:24:58 +0200 Subject: Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ? In-Reply-To: <002f01c1dd00$ca66d580$420d640a@unfix.org> References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C4E2@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> <002f01c1dd00$ca66d580$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <20020406072458.GC4144@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Jeroen, | Ofcourse if one sizes down renumbering isn't easy... | But if you move from one /48 to another /48 it should be a piece of | cake. The AMS-IX did it perfectly well last weeks. | First the routers on where in 3FFE:3000::/64 (out of the /48) now they | have moved to 2001:07F8:1::/64 (out of the /48). | | eg: 3ffe:3000::a500:8954:1 became 2001:7f8:1::a500:8954:1 The AMS-IX did not do such a great job on this. We were requested to renumber one (1) shared medium /64. To date, still several members have not renumberd theirs, some have. This is because we now run two prefixes for the time being on the AMS-IX. The renumbering aspect also takes with it the DNS aspect, and equally so I do not see things resolving yet. The delegation of the new 2001:7f8:1::/48 prefix has to be dealt with at RIPE and the AMS-IX site. Apart from that, you are missing the point that having a native uplink to your ISP/IX is also "a transition mechanism". And, I might add, one that only a small percentage of network operators has. The others have to do with 6to4 and 6in4 and perhaps nat/pt. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From pim@ipng.nl Sat Apr 6 07:32:17 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 09:32:17 +0200 Subject: New pTLA /32 and prefix-list In-Reply-To: <011901c1dcc7$9925d2c0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> References: <011901c1dcc7$9925d2c0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> Message-ID: <20020406073217.GD4144@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 07:30:36PM +0200, Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote: | Hello all, | | I remind you: new pTLA are now /32 in 3ffe:4000::/18 (check mailing-list | archives for more informations about this). Nicolas, Thanks for the reminder. My site indeed still has quite some anal filtering. This is because in the IPv6 world you cannot trust your peers that much and requesting changes in their configuration sometimes meet non-existing tech-c handles (bouncing mail) and 2 month delays. I have updated my filters at AS8954 and AS12859 though and now see the 32 bit pTLAs. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From jeroen@unfix.org Sat Apr 6 12:46:13 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 14:46:13 +0200 Subject: (6bone) renumbering In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF5A@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <000701c1dd69$096a23a0$420d640a@unfix.org> Michel Py [mailto:michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us] wrote: > Jeroen, > > > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > And one can do that with almost a flip of the switch. > > You have to explain me how you do that. I just looked at my home router > and a single /48 block appears nine times in the config and related info > such as tunnel addresses appears eight more times, so a total of > _seventeen_ occurrences of addresses related to _one_ of my pTLAs, and > again this is my home router with only one subnet, not a > production one with long access-lists, DMZs and other stuff. > > What kind of software is it that can read a config, inventory what needs > to be changed, change it, and not screw the pooch? > > | interface Loopback4046 > | description loopback for viagenie block > 1 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:4046::1/64 > | > | interface Ethernet0/1 > | description Internal network > 2 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:4046:1::1/64 > 3 | ipv6 nd prefix-advertisement 3FFE:B00:4046:1::/64 3600 3600 > | > | router bgp 23169 > 4 | network 3FFE:B00:4046::/64 > 5 | network 3FFE:B00:4046:1::/64 > 6 | aggregate-address 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 > | > 7 | ipv6 access-list IPV6-ACL-OUTSIDE-IN permit any 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 > | > | ipv6 prefix-list IPV6-PREFIX-LIST-VIAGENIE-BLOCK seq 5 permit > 8 | 3FFE:B00:4046::/48 > | > | arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us - 209.233.126.65 - ASN 23169 > 9 | 3FFE:B00:4046::1 - 3ffe:8270:5::1 - 2002:D1E9:7E41::1 > | > | interface Tunnel4046 > 10 | description tunnel to Viagenie - endpoint 3ffe:b00:c18::8c > 11 | ipv6 address 3FFE:B00:C18::8D/127 > | > | router bgp 23169 > 12 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C remote-as 10566 > 13 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C ebgp-multihop 99 > 14 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C update-source Tunnel4046 > | address-family ipv6 > 15 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C activate > 16 | neighbor 3FFE:B00:C18::8C route-map ROUTE-MAP-VIAGENIE-OUT out > | > 17 | ipv6 access-list IPV6-ACL-OUTSIDE-IN permit any 3FFE:B00:C18::8D/128 Let's say you wanted, for one reason or another, change over to 6to4 and have your router at IPv4: 10.100.13.42: The router: get config etc. dump it into file 'router.conf' cat router.conf | sed "s/3FFE:B00:4046/2002:0A64:0D2A:/g" >new-router.conf upload the config, restart/reload/reboot it, done. You do have to update your tunnel to replace it with a 6to4 instance now though, but "s/3FFE:B00:C18::8C//g" fixes that for you. If you had more routers, those routers are very probably 'under' your main router, receiving routeadverts, which they should pick up. Otherwise repeat over for the other routers. The DNS: Same as the router, dump config and use sed or similar tool to replace the old subnet with the new one. A6 records are great for this ofcourse you'll only have to change them at one place. The longest time taken will probably be the negotation with your upstreams for the new address space and ofcourse the reverse delegations. I heared some companies keep their routerconfigs in CVS, they are thus also probably in a state where they can replace their whole config in one go, issue a upload on all routers et voila. Ofcourse this all takes into consideration that you don't downsize your address space, if you do you'd prolly need a completely new numberplan. In your case you could also do an extra 'sed "s/48/60/g"' which will downsize you from that huge /48 to a /60 :) But that's because you are at the 'bottom' (3ffe:b00:4096:0:0:0:0...) of the address space. It all boils down how one manages things; In my case I would have to replace the entries in the dns, update my tunnel config (nopes no native _yet_ :( here), restart the router adverts, done. All the boxes down the trail will eventually pick up the announcements, deprecate the old prefix and start using the new one. I know this little story is taken from a very simple case but IMHO it eventually all boils down on how one manages things, doing a good job in the first place makes sure one doesn't have to handle those problems any later on. Maybe that's why there should be a nice document explaining _all_ the boobytraps we can come up with. I very probably missed out a load of them, so call me names and bring them on. Better find them, document and supply alternatives/fixes now than get them right in the face when you come accross them and really need to renumber. Who can come up with a _big_ case with loads of problems ofcourse. One thing which I still haven't seen for example is the 'server' case. If one does it the 'nice' way and want to use EUI-64 addressing, thus using the router adverts to find out and configure there prefix, there is always a possibility of a NIC going down, hardware breaking etc. You could ofcourse configure your NIC's MAC address to have a certain ID, most NIC's can do that anyways. But it would be very nice if one could instruct the networking layer of the OS to tell it "use this as an extra EUI-64 id", which could save up on downtime as now when one box goes down you ssh into the other, tell it to use the known EUI-64 id and the server is up again. One could ofcourse automate this etc. I did say 'extra EUI-64 id', this so you can always use the boxes real EUI-64 address to gain access to it. Otherwise you can't reach it if your webserver comes back online again ;) Greets, Jeroen From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Sat Apr 6 22:51:55 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 14:51:55 -0800 Subject: (6bone) renumbering Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF5B@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Jeroen, > The router: > get config etc. dump it into file 'router.conf' > cat router.conf | sed "s/3FFE:B00:4046/2002:0A64:0D2A:/g" >new-router.conf > upload the config, restart/reload/reboot it, done. There are many traps in doing that kind of thing. 1. On a reasonably complex setup, there will always be some stuff that you don't want to renumber today, but tomorrow. Automatic replacement does not work there. 2. If for some reason the device displays "3FFE:0B00:4046" instead of "3FFE:B00:4046" you are screwed. There are other issues such as servers configured with a static IP, bozos that insist on using the IP when they could have used the domain name, and so on. This is not "almost the push of a button". Besides, the main problem in renumbering is not dealing with your own setup, but dealing with all the third-party entities that connect to you using a hard-coded IP address in a zillion different places, such as static tunnels, access-lists, route-maps, distribute-lists, IPSEC tunnels, the list is endless. If you depend on these third parties for running a business (they could be suppliers, customers, etc) you have an organizational nightmare. Michel. From ehsan@iub.edu.bd Sun Apr 7 05:37:09 2002 From: ehsan@iub.edu.bd (Md. Ehsanul Haque) Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 10:37:09 +0600 Subject: remove Message-ID: <200204070427.g374RAp16838@tnt.isi.edu> remove From fmei@njnet.edu.cn Mon Apr 8 01:11:30 2002 From: fmei@njnet.edu.cn (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C3=B7=B7=C9?=) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 8:11:30 +0800 Subject: remove Message-ID: <200204080014.IAA04858@njnet.edu.cn> 6bone,您好! remove 致 礼! 梅飞 fmei@njnet.edu.cn From eagleqing@163.net Mon Apr 8 08:04:43 2002 From: eagleqing@163.net (wangzhong) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:04:43 +0800 (CST) Subject: =?gb2312?B?cmVtb3Zl?= Message-ID: <3CB1410B.00000C.15679@bjapp5> --Boundary-=_SnbNiqIoTZgjGXPJiVcxaGNeSqbb Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 6bone,您好! remove 致 礼! --Boundary-=_SnbNiqIoTZgjGXPJiVcxaGNeSqbb Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
6bone,您好!

remove


礼!






诺基亚 摩托罗拉 西门子 铃声图片放送 TOM短讯 更多精彩>>
玻璃鞋(郑秀文)
启示录(谢霆锋)
有福气(陈慧琳)
天使蓝(何韻诗)
恋爱大过天(twins)
Heartbeat(容祖儿)
阴天(莫文蔚)
唯一(王力宏)
干杯,朋友(田震)
你快回来(孙楠)
--Boundary-=_SnbNiqIoTZgjGXPJiVcxaGNeSqbb-- From fink@es.net Tue Apr 9 17:57:27 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 09:57:27 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409094935.025707a0@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, RMNET has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 23 April 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === >Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 06:05:56 +0200 (CEST) >Subject: pTLA request for RMnet (AS12533) >From: "Stefano Rotellini - RMnet" >To: > >Hi Bob and 6bone members, >On behalf of RMnet, I would like to submit our application for a pTLA. > > >1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. > >We are connected to the 6bone since December 2001 with a /48 from VIAGENIE. > > >During the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > >providing the following: > > >a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > >ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > >tunnel that the Applicant has. > >Our records on the 6bone database are up to date. >http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?rmnet-mnt >http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?rmnet > > >b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > >between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > >connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > >pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > >Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > >We have currently 3 BGP4+ peering sessions (CSELT, FASTNETXP and >EURNETCITY) on >a Cisco 2621 running IOS 12.2.8T. > > >c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > >entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > >system. > >Primary DNS server : eurnet.rmnet.it - 3ffe:b80:73c:1::1 >Secondary DNS server: saguaro.rmnet.it - 3ffe:b80:7e0:1::1 > > >d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > >providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > >Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > >IPv6 Web server is at: http://www.ipv6.rmnet.it and is pingable > > >2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > > This MUST include the following: > > > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > > for the pTLA applicant. > >We have a mail entry to the group of technical people at: ipv6@rmnet.it >Tech persons on charge of IPv6 support are: >http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?AR4-6BONE >http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?EB2-6BONE > > > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support > > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the > > ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > >The staff has access to the common mailbox: ipv6@rmnet.it > > >3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > > major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > > of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > > support this claim. > >RMnet Srl is a regional ISP located in Rome, Italy and is serving the >Internet >community since 1985. >We are actually offering our commercial services through PSTN and ISDN >dialup, >dedicated lines, ADSL lines and we are testing 802.11 Wireless >connectivity. >Our users base is about 7.500 home-users and 1.000 enterprises. > > >4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > > 6Bone backbone and user community. > >We fully agree to all current and future operational rules and policies. > > >When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply > >to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to > >the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the > >criteria above. > > >Best regards, >-- ># Stefano Rotellini ># RMnet IP Network Management ># SR397-RIPE From pekkas@netcore.fi Tue Apr 9 21:06:59 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:06:59 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409094935.025707a0@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: Hello all, The application looks ok, I'll just want to point out something that may be worth discussing on a more global scale: > > >1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. > > > >We are connected to the 6bone since December 2001 with a /48 from VIAGENIE. An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From pekkas@netcore.fi Tue Apr 9 21:07:37 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:07:37 +0300 (EEST) Subject: RFC: Don't use /127 as P-t-P prefix length? Message-ID: Hello, I presented very quickly my draft: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-savola-ipv6-127-prefixlen-01.txt at 6bone meeting at IETF53: http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/minutes/default.htm There was basically zero time for discussion so I was asked to take this to the mailing list. This is an operational problem, and the workaround or the fix (however you can phrase it) is to use basically anything other than /127 for P-t-P links. Use of /127 seems to be very common though, so I'm soliciting opinions what should be done about this, e.g.: - forget about the whole thing, it's their problem! - informational or BCP individually? - informational or BCP through ipv6 w.g.? - discussion added to address architecture draft / coming IPv6 node requirements, ... ? - other thoughts? -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net Wed Apr 10 01:41:05 2002 From: hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 20:41:05 -0400 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c1e028$664e3680$6e51580c@who> Hello from Gregg C Levine It's not you, Pekka Savola. It抯 the whole setup. I looked at that one, as well, I found it strange, as well. Perhaps Bob Fink, could comment? ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of > Pekka Savola > Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 4:07 PM > To: Bob Fink > Cc: 6BONE List; Stefano Rotellini - RMnet > Subject: Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 > > Hello all, > > The application looks ok, I'll just want to point out something that may > be worth discussing on a more global scale: > > > > >1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. > > > > > >We are connected to the 6bone since December 2001 with a /48 from > VIAGENIE. > > An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. > > Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? > > -- > Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, > Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" > Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From itojun@iijlab.net Wed Apr 10 03:24:32 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:24:32 +0900 Subject: RFC: Don't use /127 as P-t-P prefix length? In-Reply-To: pekkas's message of Tue, 09 Apr 2002 23:07:37 +0300. Message-ID: <13506.1018405472@itojun.org> >Hello, >I presented very quickly my draft: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-savola-ipv6-127-prefixlen-01.txt >at 6bone meeting at IETF53: >http://www.6bone.net/ngtrans/minutes/default.htm >There was basically zero time for discussion so I was asked to take this >to the mailing list. >This is an operational problem, and the workaround or the fix (however you >can phrase it) is to use basically anything other than /127 for P-t-P >links. I agree with what the draft says, and I like option 1 in the solutions section (use /64) the most. >- forget about the whole thing, it's their problem! >- informational or BCP individually? >- informational or BCP through ipv6 w.g.? >- discussion added to address architecture draft / coming IPv6 node >requirements, ... ? >- other thoughts? not sure where this kind of document should be placed - informational RFC? itojun From Raffaele.Dalbenzio@TILAB.COM Wed Apr 10 10:05:45 2002 From: Raffaele.Dalbenzio@TILAB.COM (D'Albenzio Raffaele) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:05:45 +0200 Subject: New version of ASpath-tree is available on line Message-ID: <6ECEC1E214F2E342814ABB1ED10E795502EFB5@EXC2K01B.cselt.it> Telecom Italia Lab released version 3.3 of ASpath-tree routing monitoring software. This version fix some bugs and is conform to new 6Bone prefix assignment policy. Valid PTLAs - 3FFE:0000::/24 thru 3FFE:3F00::/24 - 3FFE:8000::/28 thru 3FFE:83F0::/28 - 3FFE:4000::/32 thru 3FFE:7FFF::/32 It can be downloaded from http://carmen.ipv6.tilab.com/ipv6/download.html Bye, Raffaele D'Albenzio. Telecom Italia Lab IPv6 Group. From fink@es.net Wed Apr 10 15:37:57 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 07:37:57 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020409094935.025707a0@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020410073314.027c1a18@imap2.es.net> Pekka, At 11:06 PM 4/9/2002 +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: >Hello all, > >The application looks ok, I'll just want to point out something that may >be worth discussing on a more global scale: > > > > >1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. > > > > > >We are connected to the 6bone since December 2001 with a /48 from > VIAGENIE. > >An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. > >Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? What is wrong? Many times networks that want to get involved with experimenting with IPv6 cannot find reasonable geographically located pTLAs to support them with a prefix and a tunnel, so they go to freenet6. Part of the reason to expand the pTLA base is to minimize this problem by creating communities of interest with a pTLA of their own so they can then serve their users in a sensible geographical way. If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. Thanks, Bob From pekkas@netcore.fi Wed Apr 10 15:49:11 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:49:11 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020410073314.027c1a18@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Bob Fink wrote: > >An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. > > > >Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? > > What is wrong? Many times networks that want to get involved with > experimenting with IPv6 cannot find reasonable geographically located pTLAs > to support them with a prefix and a tunnel, so they go to freenet6. Part of > the reason to expand the pTLA base is to minimize this problem by creating > communities of interest with a pTLA of their own so they can then serve > their users in a sensible geographical way. > > If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the Atlantic twice. In real use this just would *not* have been acceptable. I'm sure there would have been a pTLA in, perhaps not Italy but Europe regardless willing to give space. Perhaps this might be something consider in the evaluation of proper (existing) pTLA behaviour. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From fink@es.net Wed Apr 10 16:00:30 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:00:30 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020410073314.027c1a18@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020410075534.00b976c8@imap2.es.net> Pekka, At 05:49 PM 4/10/2002 +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: >On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Bob Fink wrote: > > >An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. > > > > > >Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? > > > > What is wrong? Many times networks that want to get involved with > > experimenting with IPv6 cannot find reasonable geographically located > pTLAs > > to support them with a prefix and a tunnel, so they go to freenet6. > Part of > > the reason to expand the pTLA base is to minimize this problem by creating > > communities of interest with a pTLA of their own so they can then serve > > their users in a sensible geographical way. > > > > If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. > >If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not go >overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a part of a >block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if all my IPv6 >traffic to European countries crossed the Atlantic twice. > >In real use this just would *not* have been acceptable. > >I'm sure there would have been a pTLA in, perhaps not Italy but Europe >regardless willing to give space. Perhaps this might be something >consider in the evaluation of proper (existing) pTLA behaviour. This is done quite a bit, i.e., tunnels all over the place, and I don't really like it either. Unfortunately even when you find some place you think is close, it often is not. Anyway, it's something that's hard to police. As a pTLA peering we can exercise good management control and block ones we don't like, but as an end-site getting experience I fear it is not practical to do. If you want to add some other requirements to pTLA requesting than we already have, let Rob and I know as we are trying to work on a next version of RFC2772. In the real practical transition to IPv6 case the 6to4 approach of automatic tunneling is designed to deal with this (we hope, but still to be proven over the long term). Thanks, Bob From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Wed Apr 10 18:34:23 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 10:34:23 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF69@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Pekka, >> Bob Fink wrote: >> If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. > Pekka Savola wrote: > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the Atlantic twice. I have to disagree with you on this point. I am in California, and the first tunnel I got was from Viag閚ie in Qu閎ec. Yes, I could have asked Hurricane Electric, or I could have asked Bob Fink, or I could have asked Cisco. Who cares if my average RTT to Viag閚ie is 92ms? Not me. There are ways to adjust network latency in Quake v6 (the only IPv6 real application as of today, I think?) > In real use this just would *not* have been acceptable. The 6bone is _not_ real world. There is no real world, as of today. When we get native links, it will be time to re-assess the situation. (Bob, I can provide you with a repeater in Sacramento when you lay out that dark fiber between Berkeley and Truckee ;-) As far as I am concerned, the geographical location of a pTLA does not matter (I have a tunnel with UK, too). There are situations where the link to someone geographically close will be worse than someone at the other end of a continent. To some extent, I think that cross-ocean tunnels are a guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. Michel. From owens@nysernet.org Wed Apr 10 20:14:48 2002 From: owens@nysernet.org (Bill Owens) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 15:14:48 -0400 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF69@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.c a.us> References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF69@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.c a.us> Message-ID: At 10:34 AM -0700 4/10/02, Michel Py wrote: >Who cares if my average RTT to Viag閚ie is 92ms? Not me. There are >ways to adjust network latency in Quake v6 (the only IPv6 real >application as of today, I think?) In order to get full throughput on the v6 newsfeed I have with the University of Oregon, we had to run 12 parallel connections. In principle a single TCP stream with gigantic buffers would have worked, but the newsfeed machine wasn't able to be tuned for administrative reasons, and we had over 300ms RTT. We're down to 90ms now, thanks to some manual topology tuning. But at this point I'm sufficiently sick of working through the underlying v4 topology of the tunnels that I'm waiting for further improvements until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . Bill (who is currently running native v6) From pekkas@netcore.fi Wed Apr 10 21:35:09 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:35:09 +0300 (EEST) Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF69@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Michel Py wrote: > >> Bob Fink wrote: > >> If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the Atlantic twice. > > I have to disagree with you on this point. I am in California, and the > first tunnel I got was from Viag閚ie in Qu閎ec. Yes, I could have asked > Hurricane Electric, or I could have asked Bob Fink, or I could have > asked Cisco. I think an ISP and a user asking for a block are two different things. In any case RTT from Viagenie from Europe is around 250ms apparently. > Who cares if my average RTT to Viag閚ie is 92ms? Not me. There are ways > to adjust network latency in Quake v6 (the only IPv6 real application as > of today, I think?) Sometimes IPv6 is actually used in e.g. SSH sessions, WWW-pages etc. Nobody will want to do stuff over IPv6 if the quality is always low. > > In real use this just would *not* have been acceptable. > > The 6bone is _not_ real world. There is no real world, as of today. When > we get native links, it will be time to re-assess the situation. (Bob, I > can provide you with a repeater in Sacramento when you lay out that dark > fiber between Berkeley and Truckee ;-) Native links are a sufficient but not required condition. It would be sufficient that tunnels are only done locally "within a country or a region", or *at least* so that people with long tunnels don't use them for transit without thinking REALLY HARD about it. > As far as I am concerned, the geographical location of a pTLA does not > matter (I have a tunnel with UK, too). There are situations where the > link to someone geographically close will be worse than someone at the > other end of a continent. To some extent, I think that cross-ocean > tunnels are a guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. Let me modify your statement above a bit: "I think the tunnels are becoming a guarantee that IPv6 will not be used for production." [Note: I'm not saying all tunnels are bad, quite the contrary] This is still true if one assumes a goal of IPv6 is to be deployed on a global scale. Some might disagree about the timing and the scope. The only ways I could see to get rid of the "cruft" of 6bone would appear to be like: 1) Disband 6bone. (This may not help in a global scale anyway. But how??) 2) RFC2772 policy changes that "transit" MUST NOT be provided over non-local tunnels unless there are strong reasons to do so (and enumerate some reasons). 3) People who are serious or semi-serious about IPv6 create a blacklist of certain 6bone AS's: AS-PATHs which contain these AS's as non-terminal members are rejected. This blacklist would include all 6bone "toy" transits. This would kill legal traffic too, though.. A drawback here is that everyone these serious IPv6 people want to connect to should use similar policy so that return traffic should not be "blackholed". 4) People who are serious about IPv6 refuse to talk to any 6bone addresses, use the blacklist above, and an additional blacklist of AS's which have only 6bone addresses. (Or a whitelist..). This is possibly sufficient to keep off the "6bone pollution". 5) Others? I think we should look at option 2) or 5). I think this is an "architectural discussion" that might have been useful to have been included in 6bone meeting in IETF53. However, it might have just degenerated in a flamewar so perhaps this is for the best. In any case so that 6bone does not become dead weight that tries to pull IPv6 under the surface, we need to think of ways how to make IPv6 connectivity work better than now. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From rain@bluecherry.net Wed Apr 10 22:21:41 2002 From: rain@bluecherry.net (Ben Winslow) Date: 10 Apr 2002 16:21:41 -0500 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1018473705.3098.43.camel@halcyon> --=-R739dscFkgQZ7nLlxxeP Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 09:49, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Bob Fink wrote: > > >An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Cana= da. > > > > > >Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? > >=20 > > What is wrong? Many times networks that want to get involved with=20 > > experimenting with IPv6 cannot find reasonable geographically located p= TLAs=20 > > to support them with a prefix and a tunnel, so they go to freenet6. Par= t of=20 > > the reason to expand the pTLA base is to minimize this problem by creat= ing=20 > > communities of interest with a pTLA of their own so they can then serve= =20 > > their users in a sensible geographical way. > >=20 > > If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. >=20 > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not go > overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a part of a > block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if all my IPv6 > traffic to European countries crossed the Atlantic twice. >=20 > In real use this just would *not* have been acceptable. >=20 > I'm sure there would have been a pTLA in, perhaps not Italy but Europe > regardless willing to give space. Perhaps this might be something=20 > consider in the evaluation of proper (existing) pTLA behaviour. >=20 > --=20 > Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, > Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" > Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords I wish it weren't the case, but there are still cases where you have to accept the 'best you can get' scenario. I do agree that as much effort as possible should be taken to get a good peering point (it's my opinion that latency is a huge problem on 6bone right now--one of the joys of having an almost guarenteed 10 IPv4 routers between every IPv6 hop), a slow peer is better than no peering at all. The pTLA request is a little odd, but it may be a good idea. Presuming that there was indeed a real effort to find a good peer in Italy and that failed, this will provide a pTLA for others to contact for tunnels in the same geographical region. While the connection to the rest of 6bone may be suboptimal, regional connections should be quite a bit faster. Consider this scenario versus 5 people in the region who had all resorted to freenet6 tunnels trying to make use of IPv6--especially for something where low latency was important. Additionally, perhaps part of their intentions for becoming a pTLA are precisely to establish better European peers. Looking at their pTLA request, I think they may already have started doing this. Perhaps somebody from RMNET would like to comment? --=20 Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : A little inaccuracy sometimes System Administrator : saves tons of explanation. -- Bluecherry Internet Services : H.H. Munro, "Saki" =20 http://www.bluecherry.net/ :=20 (573) 592-0800 :=20 --=-R739dscFkgQZ7nLlxxeP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQA8tKzl2/SfDQAyrVERAuWzAJ98de4Gc1e+di7MKma9Vg6w14X+WQCghw1Z 2uDfUHmHhKyr1Oj+zITBL0Q= =lQo1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-R739dscFkgQZ7nLlxxeP-- From sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us Wed Apr 10 23:06:15 2002 From: sommerfeld@orchard.arlington.ma.us (Bill Sommerfeld) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:06:15 -0400 Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: Message from Pekka Savola of "Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:35:09 +0300." Message-ID: <20020410220620.691A82A51@orchard.arlington.ma.us> I'll point out that given the prefix length restrictions on the 6bone, getting a pTLA is just about the only way for 6bone sites to set up redundant routing. Without a pTLA, you have to renumber to fix your routing -- if I had address space from someone 250ms away i'd definitely have an incentive to arrange to qualify for a pTLA specifically to be able to set up arbitrary tunnels... - Bill From pekkas@netcore.fi Wed Apr 10 23:14:01 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 01:14:01 +0300 (EEST) Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: <20020410220620.691A82A51@orchard.arlington.ma.us> Message-ID: On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > I'll point out that given the prefix length restrictions on the 6bone, > getting a pTLA is just about the only way for 6bone sites to set up > redundant routing. > > Without a pTLA, you have to renumber to fix your routing -- if I had > address space from someone 250ms away i'd definitely have an incentive > to arrange to qualify for a pTLA specifically to be able to set up > arbitrary tunnels... Yes, I don't dispute this. This is not really criticism on RMNET (I just wondered why they didn't have a closer prefix, but that was probably an artifact). What is more important is what people get when they DO get the pTLA. Some get excited and get N^2 tunnels because they can and provide transit because it's cool. Ingredients for a disaster. At least with less than a pTLA, the damage is limited. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From wmaton@ryouko.dgim.crc.ca Wed Apr 10 23:54:58 2002 From: wmaton@ryouko.dgim.crc.ca (William F. Maton) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 18:54:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 10 Apr 2002, Pekka Savola wrote: > In any case so that 6bone does not become dead weight that tries to pull > IPv6 under the surface, we need to think of ways how to make IPv6 > connectivity work better than now. I've been following the discussion for a little bit now, and I have to say that I agree. In striving to get better connectivity to other places, I've had to "work around" the 6bone and just angle for what I could get, based on the goodness of others. (Which recalls the recent discussion of charging charging for IPv6 transit, which might bring a form of order.) This shouldn't be taken to heart or be meant to be taken as a criticism, it's just based on personal exerience. OK, so what? Well, maybe the 6bone's entropy could be intrepreted as: -a demand being made of it that it can no longer meet (Yo, ISP's!!!) -experimentation that has run its course, and just been left to fester in some areas, which is impacting others -people are taking IPv6 seriously, but treating 6bone as an operational network that isn't measuring up to preconceived notions of production networks. So how does one go about co-ordinating with some of the IPv6 "exchange points", networks and others to "fix" this? wfms From JOE@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU Thu Apr 11 01:31:15 2002 From: JOE@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU (Joe St Sauver) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 17:31:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] Message-ID: <01KGELCYKW0O8Y6XSN@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU> Hi, >> The 6bone is _not_ real world. There is no real world, as of today. Sure there is. In fact, I would assert that IPv6 is very real real today, and v6 is poised for accelerated availability (at least in the research and education network community) much in the way that IP multicast's diffusion had an inflection point a number of years back. (When native IP multicast was available and better than dvmrp connectivity, people moved... when native IPv6 is available and better than the 6bone, again, people will move) If you look at http://monon.uits.iupui.edu/abilene/ipv6/ you'll see multiple IPv6 MRTG graphs running at >T1 speeds... as far as I'm concerned, traffic at that level's a sign that IPv6 is becoming quite real. >>When >> we get native links, it will be time to re-assess the situation. (Bob, I >> can provide you with a repeater in Sacramento when you lay out that dark >> fiber between Berkeley and Truckee ;-) > >Native links are a sufficient but not required condition. It would be >sufficient that tunnels are only done locally "within a country or a >region", or *at least* so that people with long tunnels don't use them for >transit without thinking REALLY HARD about it. Depending on what your tunnelled connectivity looks like and what your native connectivity looks like, the tunnelled connectivity may (in some cases) very well end up having lower latency then the native connectivity -- it is all a function of the number and distribution of the native v6 connectivity's peerings vis-a-vis the 6bone's interconnectivity (and the 6bone's aggregate interconnectivity is actually pretty good right now, I think, even if it *is* tunnelled). Consider Internet2's Abilene IPv6 service, for example. Because Abilene currently relies exclusively on the 6tap for v6 peering with networks other than Abilene, traffic from Oregon to non-Abilene IPv6 destinations perforce HAS to travel to Chicago before it can go wherever its ultimate destination may be. If I'm going from Oregon to IPv6 destinations in Europe, Chicago's "on the way," no harm, no foul, but if I'm going from Oregon to IPv6 destinations in Japan or Korea, say, I'd sure rather NOT have to go eastward just so I can turn around and go westward... Likewise, if I lived on the East Coast instead of the West Coast, Chicago would be "on the way" for me going to Asian destinations, but an unnecessary detour if I was headed for Europe. If traffic has to make a big U turn to get delivered due to exchange point geographical distribution, I'd assert that there's a problem... SO, from my point of view, if folks want to accelerate the migration of traffic from tunnelled connectivity to native connectivity, the key step is increasing participation at additional geographically distributed IPv6 exchange points. http://www.6tap.net/ipv6-exchanges.html mentions a couple; see also the list at http://www.v6nap.net/ Alternatively, it would be terrific if Abilene and/or Canarie would offer an IPv6 International Transit Network service much as they currently offers an IPv4 ITN service for its non-US peer networks (for background on this, see: http://www.ucaid.edu/abilene/html/itnservice.html ). Regards, Joe St Sauver (joe@oregon.uoregon.edu) University of Oregon Computing Center From swm@wayport.net Thu Apr 11 02:42:51 2002 From: swm@wayport.net (Scott Martin) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:42:51 -0500 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c1e0fa$3778bd30$bae80cd8@testyd4zv9zth1> -snip- > until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . > > Bill (who is currently running native v6) Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running native IPv6 or ip+ipv6 simultaneously? Thanks, -Scott (who is currently running v6 tunneled :-) ) From swm@wayport.net Thu Apr 11 02:53:22 2002 From: swm@wayport.net (Scott Martin) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:53:22 -0500 Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000801c1e0fb$acb746b0$bae80cd8@testyd4zv9zth1> > > So how does one go about co-ordinating with some of the IPv6 "exchange > points", networks and others to "fix" this? > > wfms I suppose that until ipv6 can make a corporation money, or until the govt steps in with large amounts of $$ for funding, this "project" will still flounder about... Sorta like the mbone. This is where Microsoft could be a hero... Maybe anyway. Personally, I would love to be running native ipv6 - no renumbering worries to deal with. -Scott From swm@wayport.net Thu Apr 11 03:03:57 2002 From: swm@wayport.net (Scott Martin) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:03:57 -0500 Subject: Anyone close to L3 or UUNET Austin/Dallas/Houston I could "peer" with? Message-ID: <000b01c1e0fd$26cd21d0$bae80cd8@testyd4zv9zth1> I currently have a tunnel to VBNS (That is down right now :-( ) and would like a second peer. Thanks in advance, -Scott From jeroen@unfix.org Thu Apr 11 04:05:13 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 05:05:13 +0200 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF69@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> Michel Py wrote: > Pekka, > > >> Bob Fink wrote: > >> If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > Atlantic twice. > > I have to disagree with you on this point. I am in > California, and the first tunnel I got was from Viag閚ie in > Qu閎ec. Yes, I could have asked Hurricane Electric, or I > could have asked Bob Fink, or I could have asked Cisco. > > Who cares if my average RTT to Viag閚ie is 92ms? Not me. > There are ways to adjust network latency in Quake v6 (the > only IPv6 real application as of today, I think?) I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: - SSH (PuTTY :) - SMTP - Quake 1 + 2* - HTTP - X Can't say IMAP unfortunatly, I will have to wait till my Outlooky understands it. Serverside (courier ;) does it already though. But mail goes out and comes in over IPv6 whenever possible. And many other applications go used unnoticed. * = http://games.concepts.nl, which will be native quite soon from Amsterdam to Breda (almost cross country ;) QuakeWorld & Quake2 patches provided courtesy of Viagenie! Oh and I *do* care about latency... If you are doing transatlantic _twice_ you have at least in a sunnyweather condition 2x 80ms. That's 160ms already, typing (ssh), quaking, remote X'ing etc with 160ms is not nice :) > As far as I am concerned, the geographical location of a pTLA > does not matter (I have a tunnel with UK, too). There are > situations where the link to someone geographically close > will be worse than someone at the other end of a continent. > To some extent, I think that cross-ocean tunnels are a > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. You've got a point there :) Though I think most people will profit from good latency. That's why one can take multiple tunnels and do some nice routing based on that -> testing, experimenting -> bone :) Fortunatly these folks are requesting a pTLA so they can soon announce their block over as many tunnels they can lay their hands on and improve their latency and uhaul packeting. Greets, Jeroen From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 11 04:38:07 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 12:38:07 +0900 Subject: native IPv6 In-Reply-To: swm's message of Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:42:51 EST. <000401c1e0fa$3778bd30$bae80cd8@testyd4zv9zth1> Message-ID: <23212.1018496287@itojun.org> >> until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . >> Bill (who is currently running native v6) >Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running native IPv6 or >ip+ipv6 simultaneously? there are quite a few ISPs running IPv6 native in Japan, like: IIJ http://www.iij.com/ NTT http://www.ntt.com/ (yes, there are a lot more) vBNS seems to be running IPv6 native. http://www.wide.ad.jp/nspixp6/ (Tokyo IPv6 peering point) http://6bone.v6.wide.ad.jp/ipv6-service.html should give you more idea. at this moment it is a common practice to run separate backbone for IPv4 and IPv6 - because of router firmware stability reasons (for example, IPv6 is not available for cisco S train firmwares). I hope it to change sooner. itojun From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 11 04:48:34 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 12:48:34 +0900 Subject: 6bone Architectural Changes? [RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002] In-Reply-To: pekkas's message of Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:35:09 +0300. Message-ID: <23363.1018496914@itojun.org> >The only ways I could see to get rid of the "cruft" of 6bone would appear >to be like: > > 1) Disband 6bone. (This may not help in a global scale anyway. But >how??) > > 2) RFC2772 policy changes that "transit" MUST NOT be provided over >non-local tunnels unless there are strong reasons to do so (and enumerate >some reasons). > > 3) People who are serious or semi-serious about IPv6 create a blacklist >of certain 6bone AS's: AS-PATHs which contain these AS's as non-terminal >members are rejected. This blacklist would include all 6bone "toy" >transits. This would kill legal traffic too, though.. A drawback here is >that everyone these serious IPv6 people want to connect to should use >similar policy so that return traffic should not be "blackholed". > > 4) People who are serious about IPv6 refuse to talk to any 6bone >addresses, use the blacklist above, and an additional blacklist of AS's >which have only 6bone addresses. (Or a whitelist..). This is possibly >sufficient to keep off the "6bone pollution". > > 5) Others? assuming that pTLA requesters are doing so as a pre-qualification to get sTLA, how about this: - when applying to 6bone pTLA, one need to indicate intent to natively peer with at least one peer (at IX, or as an ISP transit customer) within certain amount of time (like 6 months) itojun From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Thu Apr 11 04:55:13 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:55:13 -0700 Subject: (6bone) bunch'o topics Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DF73@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> [consolidated multiple posts] > Ben Winslow wrote: > I wish it weren't the case, but there are still cases where you > have to accept the 'best you can get' scenario. I do agree that > as much effort as possible should be taken to get a good peering > point (it's my opinion that latency is a huge problem on 6bone > right now--one of the joys of having an almost guarenteed 10 IPv4 > routers between every IPv6 hop), a slow peer is better than no > peering at all. I agree with Ben here, not to mention that getting it for free is not bad either. > Pekka Savola wrote: > Sometimes IPv6 is actually used in e.g. SSH sessions, WWW-pages etc. Sometimes. And I'd rather waste hours of configuration for the sole purpose of telling my email buddies that I can play Quake on a v6-only server than look at a meaningless web page that says "I have a v6-only web site". I remember ten years ago configuring bridging of IPX over routed IP to play doom (it was IPX broadcast based, therefore the bridging). It appears to me that some of you are missing the point: - Viagenie is the biggest IPv6 ISP today. It makes sense to have a tunnel with them anyway (especially for free) and that is why I have one. - It is legitimate for Viagenie and any other large ISPs to service customers in the entire world. Since we do not allow them to advertise regional prefixes but only their pTLA /24, long RTTs are to be expected. - Advertising regional prefixes would be useful if they had a native backbone, and it's not with the money we are giving them (none) that they are going to build it. - I would pay for native v6 service, if I could get it that is, but this means native all the way to a major v6 backbone, which again does not exist as we speak. I don't call one ISP providing native v6 to the hotel in Minneapolis a backbone. > Scott Martin wrote: > I suppose that until ipv6 can make a corporation money, or until the > govt steps in with large amounts of $$ for funding, this "project" > will still flounder about... Sorta like the mbone. Right on the money (pun intended). > Personally, I would love to be running native ipv6 - no > renumbering worries to deal with. If you could get addresses of your own and these don't exist either. > Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > I'll point out that given the prefix length restrictions on the > 6bone, getting a pTLA is just about the only way for 6bone sites > to set up redundant routing. For the same matter, getting a subTLA too. This is not new, has been posted before and is a direct consequence of the development of v6 multihoming being torpedoed. >> The 6bone is _not_ real world. There is no real world, as of today. > Joe St Sauver wrote: > Sure there is. In fact, I would assert that IPv6 is very real real > today, and v6 is poised for accelerated availability (at least in > the research and education network community) The real world is when I can get to a multihomed IPv6 www.cnn.com, www.ebay.com, www.etrade.com, www.cisco.com and microsoft.com over native v6. Today, v6 is a toy and if was not for v4 most of us would not be able to read this. Lots of us here are working to make the toy usable, but it does not change the fact that is still is a toy and will remain a toy until we provide: a) Multihoming. b) Geographical addresses, preferably PI. c) Provider-independent (PI) addresses for large organizations or big content providers. Until these three issues are resolved (they are for v4) who can even pretend to be "serious" about IPv6? A serious global ISP that aggregates its entire worldwide address space into a single prefix? A serious portal using their ISP's address? A serious mission-critical singlehomed site? The problem is not latency over 6bone tunnels. The problem is that nobody is willing to fork out the cash to build a real v6 backbone because there is no revenue on the horizon to pay it back, because major issues have not been addressed. Michel. From bmanning@ISI.EDU Thu Apr 11 05:11:44 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 21:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: native or simulated? Message-ID: <200204110411.g3B4Big25517@boreas.isi.edu> > So how does one go about co-ordinating with some of the IPv6 "exchange > points", networks and others to "fix" this? Well, there are several exchanges that support native IPv6 and there are some ISPs that support v6 that connect to such exchanges. http://www.v6nap.net/ is one site that lists a few places to touch. And for those who are purists, cut your tunnels and -eventually- the native structure will reach you. There -MUST- be a period of transition. We've cut some tunneled sites and added native where we can. As others become enabled and show up in our neighborhood, we wellcome them. -- bill From nathan@rtfm.net Thu Apr 11 05:21:51 2002 From: nathan@rtfm.net (Nathan Dorfman) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:21:51 -0400 Subject: 6bone connection in NYC? Message-ID: <20020411002151.A98983@matrix.binary.net> Hi, I would very much like to obtain a connection to the 6bone. I am on the Speakeasy residential network (the 64.81.196/24 one). My connection is a 1.1M Symmetric DSL with several hosts, all for "hobby" purposes... I'd like to be able to be respectably close to the backbone, but have no idea what the process is. Needless to say I'll be happy with whatever is considered appropriate. :) If you might be willing to pass me a tunnel, my endpoint would be phobos.rtfm.net (64.81.196.252), feel free to give it a try with traceroute or anything else. Thanks for your time, -- "Just because a few of us can read and \ \ \\ Nathan Dorfman write and do a little math, that doesn't \ \\ nathan@rtfm.net mean we deserve to take over the universe." \ \ \\ PGP Key 0832DB12 From Merlin" Message-ID: <005d01c1e126$923358d0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> I wonder if I might come in on this conversation for a moment with another perspective. Regardless of the location of end points, and blocks and bits of blocks it seems to me that the whole idea of moving to the IPv6 network will die from lack of involvement if it can't become easier to implement. I refer of course to the actual setting up of the protocols on an actual computer. While it is of course very necessary to continue working on the outlines - RFCs etc - there needs to be some serious attempts made to see that valid HOWTOs are produced by those who fully understand the variants. I take the comment from Pekka Savola in point. > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, Well, there are many people who are serious about experimenting, but the lack of useable information is daunting. Mailing lists are ok for what they do - but often only confuse the issue. The documents that are available on the internet now on the subject of V6 are nothing if not conflicting! The biggest pool of uses or potential users - are of course those already using IPv4. This seems to then be the obvious starting point to use to build toward eventual take up of full IPv6. That time is of course many many years away. The investment in training, software, hardware, plant and commerce is so great in the IPv4 area that it will probably never be fully moved into the IPv6 area in our lifetimes. As I understand it, 6to4, using the assigned 2002: prefix was designed to enable the use of IPv6 over the existing infrastructure. An admirable idea, and it appears to work well. However, the depth of documentation on the subject again is very thin. Enough to get one host or router working if one is lucky, and precious little available to enable a whole network. Experimenting? sure. I've been fiddling with it for weeks now on and off. I have one host on my network working as a host/gateway - finally - I think. and the other host on the network that I set up in the same experimental interest as a host only is supposed to autoconfigure and connect - well it doesn't. I'm using FreeBSD which seems to be pretty common throughout the discussions, so it shouldn't be a mystery. But of course it is. But back to the topic. I've been around the Internet since it was AARNet, so I'm not exactly new to all this. I'm very sure that if I'm having problems nutting it all out, there is little hope for quite a few others. I know there are useful things like freenet6 out there, but there again - minimal documentation, and it uses a completly different prefix, 3fff I think it is from memory. This only serves to further confuse the issue for beginners. If 6to4 for a number of 'well known platforms' based on the 2002 prefix - designed as I understand it specifically to use the existing IPv4 networks - could be documented carefully and kept updated it would server to increase interest on a much wider scale. I refer to the apparent ease of understanding that numbering system. 2002 is the prefix that tells everyone that it's an address on an existing IPv4 network and probably is still being used for something useful, like a web server. The next eight hex-numbers are the IPv4 number translated to hex of the machine that is acting as the IPv6 host/gateway. the (cb01:6006 in my case) and the ::1 ( I Think) tells that it's the first host on the internal IPv6 network. This is where it all starts to get grey here. Because the second host - which one would think was numbered ::2 on that network can't be made to understand that. Any attempt to put that number on any of its interfaces simply confuses it. Interesting though, both machines can talk to each other via the fe80:: which of couse is nothing to do with the 2002 prefix. Now - I've so far received over a dozen suggestions on how to get the two machines talking to each other correctl, as well as to the internet, and every one has been different. I have a cardboard carton full of printouts of the same. Variations of the same theme. now - I'm not digressing in that discussion above. It's to point out that if it is so hard to set up an IPv6 network across an existing IPv4 network, using systems supposedly designed to facilitate that, then no one will bother after the first few frustrating attempts. If the system isn't loaded too heavily, you should actually be able to connect to http://ruby.chalmers.com.au Apache-2 install page is all, on 2002:cb01:6006::1 Now, I'm not sure if it's actually listening on the v6 port, put a ping6 to the address should work. It's the gateway/host/reouter whatever. s you can see, the origin is the HEX-MAC address of the other host. Which should be 2002:cb01:6006::2 .....OR.... as someone said, it should be 2002:cb01:6005::1 But of course it would be if it were standalone. But it's supposed to be on the same network as the 6006 one. You begin to see what I mean. $ ping6 ruby PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) fe80::210:b5ff:fee4:4386%rl0 --> 2002:cb01:6006::1 16 bytes from 2002:cb01:6006::1, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.913 ms So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their teeth into setting up any number of hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could come up with something that was readable and useable on the subject of setting up 6to4. (and on FreeBSD in my case.) I'm happy to contribute in any way I can, small as that may appear to the wizards of the pure IPv6 world. If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be able to implement it on their existing networks. just my two cents worth, Robert Chalmers Quantum Radio > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > > Atlantic twice. > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > - SSH (PuTTY :) > - SMTP > - Quake 1 + 2* > - HTTP > - X > > > > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. > You've got a point there :) > Though I think most people will profit from good latency. From rain@bluecherry.net Thu Apr 11 08:22:12 2002 From: rain@bluecherry.net (Ben Winslow) Date: 11 Apr 2002 02:22:12 -0500 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> --=-e+vUniLGhFUes4xDvdDb Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. I'll add what I can think of off the top of my head and add some questions that may benefit other list members as well as myself.=20 > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > - SSH (PuTTY :) How did you accomplish this? PuTTY seems to use IPv4 for me, although OpenSSH (which I use the majority of the time by far) works fine.=20 > - SMTP > - Quake 1 + 2* > - HTTP > - X I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? (Not that it's a good idea to do otherwise much anymore, but...)=20 >=20 I've also been wondering (although this is really beyond the scope of the list) why Mozilla on Win32 lacks IPv6 support (IE works fine.) I believe that WinXP ships with integrated IPv6 (I've never used it, so I can't say for certain), so it seems a little puzzling to me that IPv6 support is not there at all.=20 As for IPv6 applications I use on a regular basis, the ones that immediately come to mind are:=20 HTTP...LAN/Internet/Host=20 SSH....LAN/Internet/Host (mostly LAN)=20 Finger..............Host=20 (I claim to have the only IPv6-enabled finger daemon written in shell script--it even does ident lookups. finger @halcyon.bluecherry.net or http://halcyon.bluecherry.net/~rain/simple-fingerd (warning: ugly hack)) IRC....LAN/Internet/Host=20 (If anyone on the list frequents Efnet, hybrid-7 has IPv6 support--assuming they get a move on, this should make it the largest IPv6-enabled network (assuming that people run ircd on ipv6 hosts, but I have reason to believe that some will)) X......LAN (via SSH) Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? ssh, HTTP, and nfs make up the majority of my traffic, so I'm more or less content. --=20 Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : I'm from the South Bronx, and I System Administrator : don't care what you say: those Bluecherry Internet Services : cows look dangerous. -- Colin http://www.bluecherry.net/ : Powell =20 (573) 592-0800 :=20 --=-e+vUniLGhFUes4xDvdDb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQA8tTmj2/SfDQAyrVERAnQEAJ0WSJxLmRD8s1fAzExy6cCfhrT8zwCghyc9 qpgfP0HO1QXsqa6/IRh0JdQ= =vTkm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-e+vUniLGhFUes4xDvdDb-- From info@caladan.net Thu Apr 11 08:45:40 2002 From: info@caladan.net (info@caladan.net) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:45:40 +0100 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: <000401c1e0fa$3778bd30$bae80cd8@testyd4zv9zth1> References: Message-ID: <3CB54D34.27762.55F493C@localhost> We run native IPv6 as well as tunnels here in the UK, from Telehouse, London. If we want to be able to reach everyone on the 6bone we have to use tunnels as there are not enough ISP's doing it native. Regards, Chris On 10 Apr 2002 at 20:42, Scott Martin wrote: > > > > -snip- > > until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . > > > > Bill (who is currently running native v6) > > Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running native IPv6 or > ip+ipv6 simultaneously? > > Thanks, > -Scott (who is currently running v6 tunneled :-) ) From kre@munnari.OZ.AU Wed Apr 10 14:55:06 2002 From: kre@munnari.OZ.AU (Robert Elz) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:55:06 +0700 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2471.1018446906@brandenburg.cs.mu.OZ.AU> Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 23:06:59 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola Message-ID: | An ISP from Italy has a tunnel and address block from VIAGENIE in Canada. | Is it just me or does there seem to be something really wrong here? Depends upon what you see as being wrong. It most likely isn't a very efficient way to use the IPv4 internet - but with the 6bone carrying comparatively little traffic, I really don't see that this matters. As far as simulating real IPv6 nets, it is just fine - ISPs everywhere will get their connectivity from wherever it is cheapest (value for money of course, so extra issues like delays incurred count), there's no reason that either geographic or political boundaries should have any real bearing on anything. Imagining one (or several) giant exchanges in the IPv6 world, where lots of random providers connect seems quite reasonable to me. Connecting to Freenet6 (VIAGENIE) tends to give good IPv6 connectivity, as so many other sites also connect there. kre From Merlin" Message-ID: <007e01c1e132$8d429550$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Thanks Tim, Yup, got that. It's in the collection. As it stands, it could be considerd an opening introduction. But by no means does it tell the whole picture. Routing and talking to other hosts/clients on the same network isn't mentioned and so on... This bit is of course important. It is exactly what I was talking about. The 2002 space is set aside, but because no one can use it without spending weeks stuffing about - it's probably not being used by many ======================================== quote ================ 6to4 uses a special IPv6 prefix: 2002::/16. The IANA has set aside this address space just for 6to4. The 6to4 specification states that the 32 bits after 2002::/16 are the IPv4 address of the gateway machine for the network in question. This is how the packets know to find their way to your network -- the IPv4 address of your gateway is right in them! For example, if your gateway machine's IPv4 address is 192.168.2.199 (it obviously wouldn't be since that address is unroutable, but just for example), your IPv6 prefix would be 2002:c0a8:2c7::/48. Inside of that space, you have 80 bits of address space to do with as you please. Normally each subnet gets a 2^64 netmask, so that leaves 16 bits of site-local network addressing -- or 65,536 subnets. ============================================================= cheers Robert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tim Chown" To: "Merlin" Cc: "6bone" <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 5:47 PM Subject: Re: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Merlin wrote: > > > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their teeth into setting up any number of > > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could come up with something that was > > readable and useable on the subject of setting up 6to4. (and on FreeBSD in my case.) I'm happy to contribute in any way > > I can, small as that may appear to the wizards of the pure IPv6 world. > > A quite good site on 6to4 is http://www.kfu.com/~nsayer/6to4/. > > Tim > From gaoth@neusoft.com Thu Apr 11 10:07:51 2002 From: gaoth@neusoft.com (gaoth) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:07:51 +0800 Subject: newer Message-ID: <00ec01c1e138$5c2a78b0$921d70ca@gaoth> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_ueRTNdQ1afyMnt76UR00iA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I am a newer in IPv6,what is the newest and promising direction in IPv6 field? --Boundary_(ID_ueRTNdQ1afyMnt76UR00iA) Content-type: text/html; charset=gb2312 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
I am a newer in IPv6,what is the newest and promising direction in IPv6 field?
 
--Boundary_(ID_ueRTNdQ1afyMnt76UR00iA)-- From jorgen@hovland.cx Thu Apr 11 12:12:25 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 13:12:25 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: On 11 Apr 2002, Ben Winslow wrote: > Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently > using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. I'll add what I can think > of off the top of my head and add some questions that may benefit other > list members as well as myself. > > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > > - SSH (PuTTY :) > How did you accomplish this? PuTTY seems to use IPv4 for me, although > OpenSSH (which I use the majority of the time by far) works fine. > > - SMTP > > - Quake 1 + 2* > > - HTTP > > - X > I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? (Not > that it's a good idea to do otherwise much anymore, but...) > > > I've also been wondering (although this is really beyond the scope of > the list) why Mozilla on Win32 lacks IPv6 support (IE works fine.) I > believe that WinXP ships with integrated IPv6 (I've never used it, so I > can't say for certain), so it seems a little puzzling to me that IPv6 > support is not there at all. > > As for IPv6 applications I use on a regular basis, the ones that > immediately come to mind are: > HTTP...LAN/Internet/Host > SSH....LAN/Internet/Host (mostly LAN) > Finger..............Host > (I claim to have the only IPv6-enabled finger daemon written in shell > script--it even does ident lookups. finger @halcyon.bluecherry.net or > http://halcyon.bluecherry.net/~rain/simple-fingerd (warning: ugly hack)) > IRC....LAN/Internet/Host > (If anyone on the list frequents Efnet, hybrid-7 has IPv6 > support--assuming they get a move on, this should make it the largest > IPv6-enabled network (assuming that people run ircd on ipv6 hosts, but I > have reason to believe that some will)) > X......LAN > (via SSH) > > Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs > besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? Sendmail works grrreat... (you need to recompile it with ipv6 support and make a new mc) > > ssh, HTTP, and nfs make up the majority of my traffic, so I'm more or > less content. > I also use ipv6 for streaming, multicast streaming and ftp Joergen Hovland > -- > Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : I'm from the South Bronx, and I > System Administrator : don't care what you say: those > Bluecherry Internet Services : cows look dangerous. -- Colin > http://www.bluecherry.net/ : Powell > (573) 592-0800 : > From swm@wayport.net Thu Apr 11 13:46:53 2002 From: swm@wayport.net (Scott Martin) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 07:46:53 -0500 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <3CB585BD.1000100@wayport.net> > I've also been wondering (although this is really beyond the scope of > the list) why Mozilla on Win32 lacks IPv6 support (IE works fine.) I > believe that WinXP ships with integrated IPv6 (I've never used it, so I > can't say for certain), so it seems a little puzzling to me that IPv6 > support is not there at all. > WinXP pro comes with IPV6 6-4 services enabled by default (I think?). I had to do disable 6-4 services and do a "ipv6 install" from the cmd prompt to get native ipv6 working. As far as mozilla onm XP goes, not sure there... Mozilla with ipv6 on my FreeBSD 4.5 box works great though! -Scott From fink@es.net Thu Apr 11 14:36:38 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 06:36:38 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for RESTENA-LU - review closes 25 April 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020411062618.027e24a0@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, RESTENA-LU has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 25 April 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === Subject: pTLA request for RESTENA-LU (AS2602) To: fink@es.net Cc: ipv6@restena.lu From: yves.schaaf@restena.lu Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:22:38 +0100 Hi Bob and 6bone members, on behalf of RESTENA, I want to apply for a pTLA allocation from the 6bone. The RESTENA Foundation operates the national research and education network (NREN) of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Europe) and we are connected to the 6bone since July 2000. Please find information conforming to RFC 2772 below : >7. Guidelines for 6Bone pTLA sites > > The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It > should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are > expected to provide production quality backbone network services for > the 6Bone. > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > providing the following: We have about 21 months experience as a 6bone end-site. > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > tunnel that the Applicant has. inet6num: 3FFE:604:10::/48 netname: RESTENA-LU descr: delegation for RESTENA-LU country: LU admin-c: WB311-RIPE admin-c: RVDP3-RIPE tech-c: WB311-RIPE tech-c: RVDP3-RIPE remarks: This object is automatically converted from the RIPE181 registry notify: ipv6@surfnet.nl mnt-by: MNT-SURFNET changed: Wim.Biemolt@ipv6.surfnet.nl 20000625 changed: auto-dbm@whois.6bone.net 20010117 source: 6BONE inet6num: 3FFE:8039::/34 netname: RESTENA-LU descr: NLA allocation from QPTVSIX country: LU admin-c: YS2-6BONE tech-c: YS2-6BONE tech-c: AF5-6BONE notify: ipv6@restena.lu mnt-by: MNT-RESTENA [update] [delete] changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20020409 source: 6BONE inet6num: 3FFE:2024:2000::/35 netname: RESTENA-LU descr: NLA allocation from SWITCH country: LU admin-c: YS2-6BONE tech-c: YS2-6BONE tech-c: AF5-6BONE notify: ipv6@restena.lu mnt-by: MNT-RESTENA [update] [delete] changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20020409 source: 6BONE ipv6-site: RESTENA-LU origin: AS2602 descr: RESTENA-LU country: LU prefix: 3FFE:604:10::/48 prefix: 3FFE:8039::/34 prefix: 3FFE:2024:2000::/35 application: ping www.ipv6.restena.lu application: ping gate.ipv6.restena.lu tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> l1.ar1.amsterdam2.surf.net SURFNET BGP4+ tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> eth.nl2.nl.ten-155.net QTPVSIX BGP4+ tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> swi6T1.switch.ch SWITCH BGP4+ contact: AF5-6BONE contact: MS11-6BONE contact: YS2-6BONE remarks: This object is automatically converted from the RIPE181 registry notify: ipv6@restena.lu mnt-by: MNT-RESTENA changed: marc.stiefer@restena.lu 20000626 changed: auto-dbm@whois.6bone.net 20010117 changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20010206 changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20010801 changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20011026 changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20020202 changed: yves.schaaf@restena.lu 20020408 source: 6BONE mntner: MNT-RESTENA descr: Maintainer of RESTENA 6Bone objects admin-c: AF5-6BONE tech-c: AF5-6BONE tech-c: MS11-6BONE upd-to: alain.frieden@restena.lu upd-to: marc.stiefer@restena.lu mnt-nfy: alain.frieden@restena.lu mnt-nfy: marc.stiefer@restena.lu notify: marc.stiefer@restena.lu notify: yves.schaaf@restena.lu notify: ipv6@restena.lu mnt-by: MNT-RESTENA changed: marc.stiefer@restena.lu 20010206 source: 6BONE > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. We have three BGP4+ peerings : with SURFNET --> tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> l1.ar1.amsterdam2.surf.net SURFNET BGP4+ with the GEANT IPv6 test program - GTPv6 (also QTPVSIX) : --> tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> eth.nl2.nl.ten-155.net QTPVSIX BGP4+ with SWITCH --> tunnel: IPv6 in IPv4 ipv6gate.restena.lu -> swi6T1.switch.ch SWITCH BGP4+ The IPv6 router is pingable over IPv6 and IPv4. > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > system. We maintain DNS forward (AAAA) entries for ipv6.restena.lu and reverse entries for 3ffe:604:10::/48 and 3ffe:8039::/34. Nameserver #1: ipv6-ns1.ipv6.restena.lu 3ffe:2024:2000::2 158.64.56.114 Nameserver #2: ipv6-ns2.ipv6.restena.lu 3ffe:2024:2000::3 158.64.56.115 The router is called ipv6gate.restena.lu --> gate.ipv6.restena.lu. One available host system is www.ipv6.restena.lu. > d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. www.ipv6.restena.lu > 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > This MUST include the following: > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > for the pTLA applicant. AF5-6BONE YS2-6BONE > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the > ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. ipv6@restena.lu > 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > support this claim. The RESTENA Foundation operates the national research and education network (NREN) of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (Europe). We act as an ISP for our NREN community and are responsible for the management of the ccTLD LU. > 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > 6Bone backbone and user community. We agree to abide by the rules as they exist now and as they may evolve in the future. > When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply > to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to > the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the > criteria above. > >8. 6Bone Operations Group > > The 6Bone Operations Group is the group in charge of monitoring and > policing adherence to the current rules. Membership in the 6Bone > Operations Group is mandatory for, and restricted to, sites connected > to the 6Bone. > > The 6Bone Operations Group is currently defined by those members of > the existing 6Bone mailing list who represent sites participating in > the 6Bone. Therefore it is incumbent on relevant site contacts to > join the 6Bone mailing list. Instructions on how to join the list are > maintained on the 6Bone web site at < http://www.6bone.net>. > Regards, Yves Schaaf Fondation RESTENA YS136-RIPE -end From chk@pobox.com Thu Apr 11 15:05:42 2002 From: chk@pobox.com (Harald Koch) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 10:05:42 -0400 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: Your message of "11 Apr 2002 02:22:12 -0500". <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <23330.1018533942@elisabeth.cfrq.net> > How did you accomplish this? PuTTY seems to use IPv4 for me, although > OpenSSH (which I use the majority of the time by far) works fine.=20 More generally speaking, regularly checking is a good idea :-) > > - X > I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? I'm curious too; last time I checked X11 needed major work to support IPv6. > I've also been wondering (although this is really beyond the scope of > the list) why Mozilla on Win32 lacks IPv6 support (IE works fine.) IE works fine but is entirely unsupported, and you have to reinstall the magic DLL every time you ugrade IE, which makes me wonder what bugs I'm reintroducing by doing so. Interestingly, Java 1.4 ships with native IPv6, but only for Linux and Solaris 8. Perhaps the problem is that IPv6 isn't really available for Win32 (until XP)? > Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs > besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? sendmail and fetchmail. Both have IPv6 support out-of-the-box with RedHat 7.2. Other software that I use: - Apache 2.0.35 (non-beta) is now out, and supports IPv6; it's working fine for me. - CIPE (an encrypting tunnel manager) works fine with native IPv6 if you build it the right way. - zebra supports ripng and ospf6, although you really have to keep up with the CVS tree if you want stability. -- Harald Koch From wizard@italiansky.com Thu Apr 11 15:25:29 2002 From: wizard@italiansky.com (Matteo Tescione) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:25:29 +0200 Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <002201c1e164$bb968e70$8cf51150@local.comv6.com> Hi to all, this is the first time that i see a new concept: > Fortunatly these folks are requesting a pTLA so they can soon announce > their > block over as many tunnels they can lay their hands on and improve their > latency and uhaul packeting. I do agree with this "new concept"... now my question: what's wrong if someone in italy has a tunnel with someone in Us or Canada or elsewhere? I'm in italy and I have several tunnel around europe, and if sometimes rtt is over 100ms I can't see a big problem cause ipv6 load is not so high.... Just my 1 damn euro cent... Matteo Tescione ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeroen Massar" To: "'6BONE List'" <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 5:05 AM Subject: RE: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 > Michel Py wrote: > > > Pekka, > > > > >> Bob Fink wrote: > > >> If you think there is something wrong with this, please say more. > > > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > > Atlantic twice. > > > > I have to disagree with you on this point. I am in > > California, and the first tunnel I got was from Viag閚ie in > > Qu閎ec. Yes, I could have asked Hurricane Electric, or I > > could have asked Bob Fink, or I could have asked Cisco. > > > > Who cares if my average RTT to Viag閚ie is 92ms? Not me. > > There are ways to adjust network latency in Quake v6 (the > > only IPv6 real application as of today, I think?) > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > - SSH (PuTTY :) > - SMTP > - Quake 1 + 2* > - HTTP > - X > > Can't say IMAP unfortunatly, I will have to wait till my Outlooky > understands it. > Serverside (courier ;) does it already though. But mail goes out and > comes in over IPv6 whenever possible. > And many other applications go used unnoticed. > > * = http://games.concepts.nl, which will be native quite soon from > Amsterdam to Breda (almost cross country ;) > QuakeWorld & Quake2 patches provided courtesy of Viagenie! > > Oh and I *do* care about latency... If you are doing transatlantic > _twice_ you have at least in a sunnyweather condition 2x 80ms. > That's 160ms already, typing (ssh), quaking, remote X'ing etc with 160ms > is not nice :) > > > > > As far as I am concerned, the geographical location of a pTLA > > does not matter (I have a tunnel with UK, too). There are > > situations where the link to someone geographically close > > will be worse than someone at the other end of a continent. > > To some extent, I think that cross-ocean tunnels are a > > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. > You've got a point there :) > Though I think most people will profit from good latency. > That's why one can take multiple tunnels and do some nice routing > based on that -> testing, experimenting -> bone :) > > > Greets, > Jeroen > From pekkas@netcore.fi Thu Apr 11 15:50:09 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 17:50:09 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020411161146.027ffec0@194.183.26.24> Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Stefano Rotellini wrote: > we have also 2 (it is 2 not '22') more tunnels/BGP sessions, to optimize > outgoing traffic in a sensible geographical way: > CSELT - Italian traffic > FASTNETXP - European traffic ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is incorrect. Your /48 route may have reached FASTNETXP, but it does not go any further than that. It will be filtered out. FASTNETXP != Europe :-)) -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From info@caladan.net Thu Apr 11 16:29:03 2002 From: info@caladan.net (info@caladan.net) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:29:03 +0100 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: References: <3CB54D34.27762.55F493C@localhost> Message-ID: <3CB5B9CF.22588.707970C@localhost> We were one of the first to join UK6X but since joining it's gone dead, there seems to be no interest - we never get any emails from the mailing list anymore and repeated requests to peer results in responses like "soon" or "we'd love to peer but were not ready yet", etc :( So unless you know different? We have cables between ourselves and UK6X and ourselves and UUNET, If anyone else would like to peer with us natively either direct or via UK6X, we have a presence in Telehouse, London and MCC, Manchester. We could also get connectivity to Redbus in London if req'd. Regards, Chris On 11 Apr 2002 at 9:09, Tim Chown wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Have you considered connectiong to the UK6X run by BTexact? > > Tim > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 info@caladan.net wrote: > > > We run native IPv6 as well as tunnels here in the UK, from > > Telehouse, London. > > > > If we want to be able to reach everyone on the 6bone we have to use > > tunnels as there are not enough ISP's doing it native. > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > > > On 10 Apr 2002 at 20:42, Scott Martin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -snip- > > > > until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . > > > > > > > > Bill (who is currently running native v6) > > > > > > Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running native > > > IPv6 or ip+ipv6 simultaneously? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Scott (who is currently running v6 tunneled :-) ) > > > > > > From pim@ipng.nl Thu Apr 11 17:13:35 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 18:13:35 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <20020411161335.GC20509@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Hi, I am sometimes amazed on how many people seem to feal that IPv6 is not yet in use. Although I do not know any company that is truely running production (paid) services with it, many endusers I know of (300 or more) use IPv6 on a daily basis, most of them to circumvent NAT problems at ISPs that give them 1 IP per dialup/cablemodem. For the newcomers here, and also for any European entity who would wish to gain pTLA status at some time, please visit http://www.ipng.nl/ and see what Jeroen and I have been building for the last 3 years. Anyone with a brain, a static IPv4 address and 24/7 connectivity can join at our site. I actually agree with Pekka that you should try to keep traffic local and look for a tunnelbroker in your area, I'm sure that http://hs247.com/ has a list for you. | > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: | > - SSH (PuTTY :) | How did you accomplish this? PuTTY seems to use IPv4 for me, although | OpenSSH (which I use the majority of the time by far) works fine. Jeroen has ported it himself, and you can download a copy from his pages at http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/ or simply download a newer version because the author of PuTTY has incorporated Jeroen's patches into the CVS. Jeroen does wonderful work on porting apps we need at IPng ;-) | > - SMTP Postfix works fine with patches. Sendmail works also fine. | > - Quake 1 + 2* heh. | > - HTTP | > - X | I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? (Not | that it's a good idea to do otherwise much anymore, but...) X can work fine over IPv6, I don't remember ever having to patch anything. The server simply opens a listen socket in the AF_INET6 world. I also use NFS over IPv6 (since NetBSD started supporting this), it works fine for me, even on 100 mbps MAN connections. | IRC....LAN/Internet/Host | (If anyone on the list frequents Efnet, hybrid-7 has IPv6 | support--assuming they get a move on, this should make it the largest | IPv6-enabled network (assuming that people run ircd on ipv6 hosts, but I | have reason to believe that some will)) The IRCNet ircd has support since 2.9, full fledged however the coding team there is thinking about a rewrite of the code so it is less hacky and more of what you'd come to expect from portable code (eg, struct sockaddr and getaddrinfo() et al) groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From krispate@yahoo.com Thu Apr 11 17:35:38 2002 From: krispate@yahoo.com (Kris Pate) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:35:38 -0500 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <001e01c1e176$ea03e980$800101df@tsengr.com> Has anyone ported VoIP applications to IPv6 (ie. SIP phones or gateways)? We had a vendor that had IPv6 support on their roadmap for their SIP phones and proxy until their funding fell short. Kris Pate v772-3525 (972) 729-3525 Kris.Pate@wcom.com <>< -----Original Message----- From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of Ben Winslow Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 2:22 AM To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. I'll add what I can think of off the top of my head and add some questions that may benefit other list members as well as myself. > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > - SSH (PuTTY :) How did you accomplish this? PuTTY seems to use IPv4 for me, although OpenSSH (which I use the majority of the time by far) works fine. > - SMTP > - Quake 1 + 2* > - HTTP > - X I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? (Not that it's a good idea to do otherwise much anymore, but...) > I've also been wondering (although this is really beyond the scope of the list) why Mozilla on Win32 lacks IPv6 support (IE works fine.) I believe that WinXP ships with integrated IPv6 (I've never used it, so I can't say for certain), so it seems a little puzzling to me that IPv6 support is not there at all. As for IPv6 applications I use on a regular basis, the ones that immediately come to mind are: HTTP...LAN/Internet/Host SSH....LAN/Internet/Host (mostly LAN) Finger..............Host (I claim to have the only IPv6-enabled finger daemon written in shell script--it even does ident lookups. finger @halcyon.bluecherry.net or http://halcyon.bluecherry.net/~rain/simple-fingerd (warning: ugly hack)) IRC....LAN/Internet/Host (If anyone on the list frequents Efnet, hybrid-7 has IPv6 support--assuming they get a move on, this should make it the largest IPv6-enabled network (assuming that people run ircd on ipv6 hosts, but I have reason to believe that some will)) X......LAN (via SSH) Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? ssh, HTTP, and nfs make up the majority of my traffic, so I'm more or less content. -- Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : I'm from the South Bronx, and I System Administrator : don't care what you say: those Bluecherry Internet Services : cows look dangerous. -- Colin http://www.bluecherry.net/ : Powell (573) 592-0800 : _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com From andreas@naund.org Thu Apr 11 17:40:52 2002 From: andreas@naund.org (Andreas Ott) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 09:40:52 -0700 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' Message-ID: <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> Hello, after I plugged in a new host on a private network this morning, I got this error in the name server syslog: Apr 11 08:54:28 hal9000 named[17197]: Lame server on 'c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.ip6.int' (in 'ip6.int'?): [128.250.1.21].53 'munnari.oz.au' On a side note, I have trouble extracting a contact address for this host out of whois, using the whois.apnic.net server (the latter problem might be pilot error). Thanks, andreas -- Andreas Ott andreas@naund.org From bruce_campbell@ripe.net Thu Apr 11 19:26:30 2002 From: bruce_campbell@ripe.net (Bruce Campbell) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:26:30 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Andreas Ott wrote: > Hello, > after I plugged in a new host on a private network this morning, I got > this error in the name server syslog: > > Apr 11 08:54:28 hal9000 named[17197]: Lame server on 'c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.ip6.int' (in 'ip6.int'?): [128.250.1.21].53 'munnari.oz.au' I think you want to be setting up: c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int ( note additional 'f.3.' before 'ip6.int' ) > On a side note, I have trouble extracting a contact address for this host kre (Robert Elz) is the contact for munnari, as divulged by: host -t txt e.f.f.3.ip6.int | grep munnari A lot of ip6.int zones apparently hosted at munnari are not served by munnari (see both kre and bill manning for this). > out of whois, using the whois.apnic.net server (the latter problem might > be pilot error). Whois.apnic.net is not currently authoritative for any IPv4 address that munnari is bound to. --==-- Bruce. Speaking for myself From bmanning@ISI.EDU Thu Apr 11 19:31:06 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> from Andreas Ott at "Apr 11, 2 09:40:52 am" Message-ID: <200204111831.g3BIV6b11895@boreas.isi.edu> % Hello, % after I plugged in a new host on a private network this morning, I got % this error in the name server syslog: % % Apr 11 08:54:28 hal9000 named[17197]: Lame server on 'c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.ip6.int' (in 'ip6.int'?): [128.250.1.21].53 'munnari.oz.au' Looks like a typo on munnari. the proper delegation would be: c.c.(...).e.f.f.3.ip6.int could be that there are some oddities since the servers for ip6.int have some RR types that older versions of BIND have problems with. to wit: ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: y.ip6.int. 86400 IN AAAA 3ffe:50e::1 z.ip6.int. 86400 IN A 198.32.2.66 z.ip6.int. 86400 IN A6 0 3ffe:0:1::c620:242 z.ip6.int. 86400 IN AAAA 3ffe:0:1::c620:242 ns3.nic.fr. 55930 IN A 192.134.0.49 flag.ep.net. 86400 IN A 198.32.4.13 flag.ep.net. 86400 IN A6 0 3ffe:805::2d0:b7ff:fee8:c4d9 munnari.oz.au. 142306 IN A 128.250.22.2 munnari.oz.au. 142306 IN A 128.250.1.21 ;; Query time: 15 msec ;; SERVER: 3ffe:805::2d0:b7ff:fee8:c4d9#53(3ffe:805::2d0:b7ff:fee8:c4d9) ------------------------------------------------------ % % On a side note, I have trouble extracting a contact address for this host % out of whois, using the whois.apnic.net server (the latter problem might % be pilot error). % Thanks, andreas % -- % Andreas Ott andreas@naund.org % -- --bill From jeroen@unfix.org Thu Apr 11 19:35:51 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:35:51 +0200 Subject: native IPv6 In-Reply-To: <23212.1018496287@itojun.org> Message-ID: <000c01c1e187$b64f9d30$420d640a@unfix.org> itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >> until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . > >> Bill (who is currently running native v6) > >Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running > native IPv6 or > >ip+ipv6 simultaneously? > > there are quite a few ISPs running IPv6 native in Japan, like: > IIJ http://www.iij.com/ > NTT http://www.ntt.com/ > (yes, there are a lot more) > > vBNS seems to be running IPv6 native. > > http://www.wide.ad.jp/nspixp6/ (Tokyo IPv6 peering point) > http://6bone.v6.wide.ad.jp/ipv6-service.html > should give you more idea. > > at this moment it is a common practice to run separate backbone for > IPv4 and IPv6 - because of router firmware stability reasons (for > example, IPv6 is not available for cisco S train firmwares). > I hope it to change sooner. > >itojun AMS-IX does IPv6 and IPv4 over the same shared medium. Other IX's supporting native IPv6 can be found at: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/IPng/IPv6_Internet_Excha nges/ And Access Providers / ISP's: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/IPng/IPv6_Access_Provide rs/ Did I spam those already? :) Ofcourse if you got more, don't hesitate to submit! Greets, Jeroen From pekkas@netcore.fi Thu Apr 11 20:28:03 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 22:28:03 +0300 (EEST) Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: <3CB5B9CF.22588.707970C@localhost> Message-ID: On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 info@caladan.net wrote: > We were one of the first to join UK6X but since joining it's gone > dead, there seems to be no interest - we never get any emails from > the mailing list anymore and repeated requests to peer results in > responses like "soon" or "we'd love to peer but were not ready yet", > etc :( > > So unless you know different? We have cables between ourselves > and UK6X and ourselves and UUNET, If anyone else would like to > peer with us natively either direct or via UK6X, we have a presence > in Telehouse, London and MCC, Manchester. I have no idea about policies etc. and what organizations are there and how big you are, but at least in IPv4 world, some big players are reluctant to peer with smaller players, have a customer relationship. Perhaps some in UK6x feel this way. IPv6 is not all that much business now, but peering might be difficult to remove gracefully later on. Or perhaps people there just don't care. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From kusune@sfc.wide.ad.jp Thu Apr 11 20:31:21 2002 From: kusune@sfc.wide.ad.jp (Takeshi Kusune) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 04:31:21 +0900 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:26:30 JST." Message-ID: <200204111928.g3BJSMaf005587@chiharu.v6.linux.or.jp> In the mail at Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:26:30 +0200 (CEST), Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' Bruce Campbell wrote: >> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Andreas Ott wrote: >> > Apr 11 08:54:28 hal9000 named[17197]: Lame server on 'c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.ip6.int' (in 'ip6.int'?): [128.250.1.21].53 'munnari.oz.au' >> >> I think you want to be setting up: >> c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int >> ( note additional 'f.3.' before 'ip6.int' ) When is IPv6 address extended to 136 bits? :-) I think it is for a link-local address. -- Takeshi Kusune From Q@ping.be Thu Apr 11 21:45:27 2002 From: Q@ping.be (Kurt Roeckx) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 22:45:27 +0200 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: ; from bruce_campbell@ripe.net on Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:26:30PM +0200 References: <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> Message-ID: <20020411224527.A1451@ping.be> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:26:30PM +0200, Bruce Campbell wrote: > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Andreas Ott wrote: > > > Hello, > > after I plugged in a new host on a private network this morning, I got > > this error in the name server syslog: > > > > Apr 11 08:54:28 hal9000 named[17197]: Lame server on 'c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.ip6.int' (in 'ip6.int'?): [128.250.1.21].53 'munnari.oz.au' > > I think you want to be setting up: > > c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int > > ( note additional 'f.3.' before 'ip6.int' ) It's a link-local address that has a problem. It's fe80::a00:20ff:fe72:3fcc It should just return that there is no such domain. Kurt From stuart@tech.org Thu Apr 11 22:03:38 2002 From: stuart@tech.org (Stephen Stuart) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 14:03:38 -0700 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 2002 20:26:30 +0200." Message-ID: <200204112103.g3BL3cI16944@lo.tech.org> > ( note additional 'f.3.' before 'ip6.int' ) Actually, it looked like reverse for a link-local address, which would appear under 0.8.e.f.ip6.int. Stephen From andreas@naund.org Thu Apr 11 23:22:56 2002 From: andreas@naund.org (Andreas Ott) Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:22:56 -0700 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: ; from bruce_campbell@ripe.net on Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:26:30PM +0200 References: <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> Message-ID: <20020411152256.B20378@naund.org> Hi, On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:26:30PM +0200, Bruce Campbell wrote: > I think you want to be setting up: > c.c.f.3.2.7.e.f.f.f.0.2.0.0.a.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int > ( note additional 'f.3.' before 'ip6.int' ) Not really, that would be 136-bit (34 * 4). The problem originated by some box on my network doing a reverse DNS lookup on the link-local inet6 fe80::a00:20ff:fe72:3fcc%le0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 and that triggered the named error message in syslog. I still don't understand why any machine would do this reverse lookup shortly after the new machine booted, but it should not return any configuration error. > kre (Robert Elz) is the contact for munnari, as divulged by: > host -t txt e.f.f.3.ip6.int | grep munnari Thnx, I think he will see the conversation over this list at some point ;-) . -andreas -- Andreas Ott andreas@naund.org From feico@pasta.cs.uit.no Thu Apr 11 23:33:17 2002 From: feico@pasta.cs.uit.no (Feico Dillema) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 00:33:17 +0200 Subject: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <005d01c1e126$923358d0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <005d01c1e126$923358d0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <20020411223317.GI8121@pasta.cs.uit.no> On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:00:14PM +1000, Merlin wrote: > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their teeth into setting up any number of > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could come up with something that was Here 's the package (a perl script) that does it all for you on NetBSD: ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/net/6to4/README.html Step 0: man 6to4 and read the instructions or alternatively: Step 1: edit 6to4.conf (basically, uncomment the relay you want to use) Step 2: run: `6to4 start` Step 3: ping6 www.kame.net Probably the same works on the other *BSDs. I don't think it get's more simple than that. Not much anyway. > If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be able to implement it on their existing networks. Well, people can and people do. We've run IPv6 only in our lab and at home for more than 2 years now, and things simply work and I've almost forgotten how to split a 3bit IPv4 net in 2 subnets just to add wireless connectivity to my home e.g. ;-} My IPv6 (only!) home router says: 1 dillema@spam.dillema.net:~> uptime 10:43PM up 359 days, 7:34, 0 users, load averages: 0.32, 0.14, 0.10 and I've almost forgotten were it is. I'll find it (and take it down. snif) when I move house soon. We have many such homerouters around, used to give faculty members and students wavelan connectivity from university to the home. Many of them hardly new what a netmask was, but all managed to set up their own NetBSD IPv6 router by following the instructions in e.g. http://www2.no.netbsd.org/Documentation/network/ipv6/ I bet on some other OSes there's is or will be some button to press to simply enable or disable IPv6 and/or 6to4, or maybe it will `just be there'. Most people won't care. Those that do and are in the business of setting up routers, may be required to read and follow some instructions. Soon, I expect some router configuration protocol will also make that unecessary for regular clients of ISPs. In short, I do not think IPv6 has a problem here. Quite the contrary. When handing out 2bit IPv4 nets to people at home, we typically ended up configuring things for them. With IPv6 saying: ``follow the instructions of the FAQ'' typically works out just fine. Feico Dillema. - Almost but not quite entirely a problem. From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 12 02:21:34 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:21:34 +0900 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: krispate's message of Thu, 11 Apr 2002 11:35:38 EST. <001e01c1e176$ea03e980$800101df@tsengr.com> Message-ID: <1052.1018574494@itojun.org> >Has anyone ported VoIP applications to IPv6 (ie. SIP phones or >gateways)? We had a vendor that had IPv6 support on their roadmap for >their SIP phones and proxy until their funding fell short. a company called "softfront" has VoIP stack/application. couldn't find any english webpage, but here are the URLs (2nd one includes contact for their San Jose branch): http://www.softfront.co.jp/tech/ipv6.html http://www.softfront.co.jp/contact/office.html itojun From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 12 02:45:24 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:45:24 +0900 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: Q's message of Thu, 11 Apr 2002 22:45:27 +0200. <20020411224527.A1451@ping.be> Message-ID: <1294.1018575924@itojun.org> >It's a link-local address that has a problem. It's >fe80::a00:20ff:fe72:3fcc >It should just return that there is no such domain. DNS is a worldwide, global, database. link-local addresses (and site- local addresses) are local to your link (or site). you cannot reverse- resolve (or forward-resolve) link-locals or site-locals. if you really want to do that, you have a couple of ways: - configure a local nameserver that serves 0.8.e.f.ip6.int, just like you would configure nameservers for private addressees. be sure not to leak information from the zone. - use icmp6 name lookup protocol instead (draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-name-lookups-08.txt) in any case, link-locals are not really for daily use. itojun From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 12 02:57:32 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:57:32 +0900 Subject: IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: chk's message of Thu, 11 Apr 2002 10:05:42 -0400. <23330.1018533942@elisabeth.cfrq.net> Message-ID: <1356.1018576652@itojun.org> >> > - X >> I'm curious: Have you accomplished this without ssh tunneling? >I'm curious too; last time I checked X11 needed major work to support IPv6. there was a patch for XFree86 3.3.x from INRIA. yes, it needs a major work, and it does not support scoped address yet (does not use sockaddrs). files are mirrored and kept at: ftp://ftp.kame.net/pub/inria/x11/ itojun From info@caladan.net Fri Apr 12 08:13:59 2002 From: info@caladan.net (info@caladan.net) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 08:13:59 +0100 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: References: <3CB5B9CF.22588.707970C@localhost> Message-ID: <3CB69747.4463.A68D46D@localhost> On 11 Apr 2002 at 22:28, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 info@caladan.net wrote: > > > So unless you know different? We have cables between ourselves and > > UK6X and ourselves and UUNET, If anyone else would like to peer with > > us natively either direct or via UK6X, we have a presence in > > Telehouse, London and MCC, Manchester. > > I have no idea about policies etc. and what organizations are there > and how big you are, but at least in IPv4 world, some big players are > reluctant to peer with smaller players, have a customer relationship. > > Perhaps some in UK6x feel this way. IPv6 is not all that much > business now, but peering might be difficult to remove gracefully > later on. IPv6 is driven by the engineer and technical people, IPv4 is driven by the people concerned with commercial reality, so the two worlds (at the moment) are completely different. We are a relatively small ISP but even so, we manage to peer with most people in the IPv4 world, apart from the really big carriers, who as you say are reluctant or simply will not peer with us. In IPv6 world this is (currently) simply not the case - we have a direct cable to UUNET and we peer with BT at UK6X - two of the biggest ! It just seems that although the technical people are interested in IPv6, maybe the people who dish out the money are not yet convinced? I hope UK6X and all the other native IPv6 exchanges are a success, but to it's just not happening... yet. Chris From rblechinger@noc.eurocyber.net Fri Apr 12 09:07:45 2002 From: rblechinger@noc.eurocyber.net (Blechinger Robert) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 10:07:45 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <3CB695D1.B7016A7A@cybernet-ag.net> Hi, I regular use follwing: - nntp ( news.ipv6.eurocyber.net, we're searching for more ipv6 newsfeeds ) - smtp ( sendmail, postfix, i transfer all my mails home over static ipv6 address based on a dynamic ipv4 connection, xDSL ) - ssh - telnet ( nemesis.de Port 2000, Playing a MUD ) - http ( all of my hosted domains are accessable over v4+v6, 14 domains ) - http freebsd mirror: http://freebsd.lostinspace.de (v4+v6) http://freebsd.ipv6.lostinspace.de ( v6 only ) - native BGP4 peerings in germany. INXS( Munich) and DE-CIX ( Frankfurt am Main ) Regards Robert -- Blechinger Robert Cybernet AG - Networking email: rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net Phone: +49 89 99315 - 116 Fax: +49 89 99315 - 199 Love is just a kiss away... From pim@ipng.nl Fri Apr 12 12:01:46 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:01:46 +0200 Subject: AMS-v6-IX member count Message-ID: <20020412110146.GA797@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Hi, Reading about the apparent lack of interrest in (larger) ISPs I can agree on this. However, for my local situation in The Netherlands, we have a native peering point at the Amsterdam Internet Exchange (AMS-IX). >From 1999 through june 2000, we had a seperate VLAN for IPv6 exchange, but sinds Q3 2000 we are fully operational on the shared medium where IPv4 traffic and IPv6 traffic are both exchanged. A quick sweep of the shared medium shows that there are 129 members with 131 AS numbers on 180 ports doing IPv4 connectivity. There are currently 9 of these parties handling IPv6 traffic on 11 ports with 9 AS numbers. I forsee this number increasing rapidly over the next 12 months, partly due to a joint effort by some large ISPs to create a roadmap to AMS-v6-IX in which all amsix connected parties may participate. Groet, Pim ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From kre@munnari.OZ.AU Fri Apr 12 12:37:33 2002 From: kre@munnari.OZ.AU (Robert Elz) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 18:37:33 +0700 Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: <20020411152256.B20378@naund.org> References: <20020411152256.B20378@naund.org> <20020411094052.A19832@naund.org> Message-ID: <2544.1018611453@brandenburg.cs.mu.OZ.AU> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:22:56 -0700 From: Andreas Ott Message-ID: <20020411152256.B20378@naund.org> | Thnx, I think he will see the conversation over this list at some point ;-) . Yes, he did... A new munnari with all of this stuff fixed is going to "go live" in a couple of weeks (waiting for me to get back to Aus so I can baby sit the transition). Sorry about the mess with the current (old) one. A side benefit is that the new one will be IPv6 reachable (including DNS). kre From bruce_campbell@ripe.net Fri Apr 12 12:41:21 2002 From: bruce_campbell@ripe.net (Bruce Campbell) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:41:21 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Lame server on '....0.8.e.f.ip6.int' In-Reply-To: <1294.1018575924@itojun.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >It's a link-local address that has a problem. It's > >fe80::a00:20ff:fe72:3fcc > >It should just return that there is no such domain. > > DNS is a worldwide, global, database. link-local addresses (and site- > local addresses) are local to your link (or site). you cannot reverse- > resolve (or forward-resolve) link-locals or site-locals. And very definitely my mistake in first parsing the question as a 3ffe:: address, my apologies in leaping to an inaccurate conclusion. On the original question, here is a quick'n'dirty script to check your delegation chain from the root: #!/bin/bash # While we have command line arguments, loop while [ "$1" ] ; do domain="" for rawpart in `echo $1 | rev | tr '.' ' '` ; do domain="`echo $rawpart | rev`.$domain" # You could also use 'host -C $domain' # Caution - some parts of the tree may not exist - # the parent domain may be several steps above. host -t any $domain done shift done --==-- Bruce. From sgittz@lineone.net Fri Apr 12 12:59:23 2002 From: sgittz@lineone.net (Dafydd Giddins) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 12:59:23 +0100 Subject: Reomve me from your list Message-ID: <001d01c1e219$7dfb5e50$0100a8c0@nebuchadnezzar> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C1E221.DFC14CF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please remove me form your mailing list sgittz@lineone.net Dafydd Giddins ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C1E221.DFC14CF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please remove me form your mailing = list

 

sgittz@lineone.net

 

Dafydd<= font size=3D2 face=3DArial> = Giddins

------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C1E221.DFC14CF0-- From gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx Fri Apr 12 15:00:14 2002 From: gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx (M. en C. Gabriela A. Campos G.) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 08:00:14 -0600 Subject: REMOVE ME FROM YOUR LIST Message-ID: <3CB6E86E.A7910774@campus.cem.itesm.mx> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------4EC5FBF66BF2C4230135BED3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please remove me form your mailing list gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx Gabriela Campos --------------4EC5FBF66BF2C4230135BED3 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="gcampos.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for M. en C. Gabriela A. Campos G. Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="gcampos.vcf" begin:vcard n:; x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://research.cem.itesm.mx/gcampos/index.htm org:ITESM-CEM;Sistemas de Informaci髇 version:2.1 email;internet:gcampos@campus.cem.itesm.mx adr;quoted-printable:;;Carr. Lago de Guadalupe Km 3.5,=0D=0ACol. Margarita Maza de Ju=E1rez,=0D=0AAtizap=E1n de Zaragoza, Edo. de M=E9xico=0D=0A;;;CP. 52926; fn:M. en C. Gabriela A. Campos G. end:vcard --------------4EC5FBF66BF2C4230135BED3-- From jochen@scram.de Fri Apr 12 14:20:45 2002 From: jochen@scram.de (Jochen Friedrich) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 15:20:45 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <23330.1018533942@elisabeth.cfrq.net> Message-ID: Hi Harald, > > Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs > > besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? > > sendmail and fetchmail. Both have IPv6 support out-of-the-box with > RedHat 7.2. Here at scram! e.V., we use sendmail and cyrus imap, both with IPv6 support. Current CVS mutt also supports IPv6, so i'm completely happy with Mail :-). Cheers, --jochen From arun.mahabier@cmg.nl Fri Apr 12 15:21:39 2002 From: arun.mahabier@cmg.nl (Arun Mahabier) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:21:39 +0200 Subject: Reomve me from your list Message-ID: 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_01C1E22D.5C601150 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Please remove me form your mailing list E-mail: arun.mahabier@cmg.nl -----Original Message----- From: Dafydd Giddins [mailto:sgittz@lineone.net] Sent: vrijdag 12 april 2002 13:59 To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Reomve me from your list Please remove me form your mailing list sgittz@lineone.net Dafydd Giddins ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1E22D.5C601150 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Please remove me form = your mailing=20 list

 

E-mail: arun.mahabier@cmg.nl

-----Original Message-----
From: Dafydd Giddins=20 [mailto:sgittz@lineone.net]
Sent: vrijdag 12 april 2002=20 13:59
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Reomve me from = your=20 list

Please remove me form = your mailing=20 list

 

sgittz@lineone.net

 

Dafydd=20 Giddins

------_=_NextPart_001_01C1E22D.5C601150-- From daniel@ipnet.co.za Fri Apr 12 16:15:30 2002 From: daniel@ipnet.co.za (Daniel Schroder) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 15:15:30 -0000 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200204121515.g3CFFVfl096138@unix.za.net> Jochen Friedrich said: Just a question. I've been using Ipv6 for mail quite sometime , and was wondering why this mailling list does not try to first send on the 6bone ? I know my 6Bone mail is working , including the websight (unix.za.net) .. for more than a year now. Send mail to daniel@unix.za.net , and it will come through on the 6bone is you would like to try . I'm allmost at the stage were one could only use Ipv6 for mail setups over multiple cities. Daniel > Hi Harald, > > > > Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs > > > besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? > > > > sendmail and fetchmail. Both have IPv6 support out-of-the-box with > > RedHat 7.2. > > Here at scram! e.V., we use sendmail and cyrus imap, both with IPv6 > support. > > Current CVS mutt also supports IPv6, so i'm completely happy with Mail > :-). > > Cheers, > --jochen > -- -Daniel Schroder (Ipnet) Unix Networks and Systems Admin From fink@es.net Fri Apr 12 16:29:30 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 08:29:30 -0700 Subject: 6bone pTLA 3FFE:4002::/32 allocated to MOTOROLA-LABS Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020412082545.02848c60@imap2.es.net> MOTOROLA-LABS has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:4002::/32 having finished its 2-week review period. Note that it will take a short while for their pTLA inet6num entry to appear in the 6bone registry as they have to create it themselves. However, their registration is listed on: [To create a reverse DNS registration for pTLAs, please send the prefix allocated above, and a list of at least two authoritative nameservers, to hostmaster@ep.net.] Thanks, Bob From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Fri Apr 12 16:47:32 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 17:47:32 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <3CB695D1.B7016A7A@cybernet-ag.net> Message-ID: <000001c1e239$5c4a21e0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On > Behalf Of Blechinger Robert > Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 10:08 AM > To: Ben Winslow > Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: Re: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use > Hi, > > I regular use follwing: > > - nntp ( news.ipv6.eurocyber.net, we're searching for more ipv6 > newsfeeds ) We have a news server IPv4/IPv6: newsfeed.fr.ndsoftwarenet.com (crash disk this morning, we have loss all previous usenet message on the server) We can feed (only in IPv6): fr.*,uk.*,microsoft.*,de.*,comp.*,deine.*,be.*,news.* No other groups, the server have low bandwitch for the moment. Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET From r.martin@ardentcomm.com Fri Apr 12 18:46:34 2002 From: r.martin@ardentcomm.com (Roderick Martin) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 13:46:34 -0400 Subject: remove Message-ID: please remove from list Rod L. Martin Sr. Network Engineer CCDP, CFA, JNCIS Ardent Communications r.martin@ardentcomm.com THE DRAGON HAS RISEN From pim@ipng.nl Fri Apr 12 19:23:34 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 20:23:34 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <200204121515.g3CFFVfl096138@unix.za.net> References: <200204121515.g3CFFVfl096138@unix.za.net> Message-ID: <20020412182334.GB11503@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Hi Daniel, | Just a question. | I've been using Ipv6 for mail quite sometime , and was | wondering why this mailling list does not try to first | send on the 6bone ? I know my 6Bone mail is working , including | the websight (unix.za.net) .. for more than a year now. Well, I'm not sure that ISI.edu has IPv6 connectivity themselves on their mail platform, eg: $ host -t MX isi.edu isi.edu mail is handled (pri=10) by gamma.isi.edu isi.edu mail is handled (pri=0) by tnt.isi.edu $ host -t AAAA tnt.isi.edu (none) $ host -t AAAA gamma.isi.edu (none) | Send mail to daniel@unix.za.net , and it will come through | on the 6bone is you would like to try . I'm allmost at the | stage were one could only use Ipv6 for mail setups over multiple | cities. I have CC:ed daniel@unix.za.net and you'll see it coming in over IPv6 at your site, because: $ host -t MX ipng.nl ipng.nl mail is handled (pri=20) by hog.ipng.nl ipng.nl mail is handled (pri=10) by mailhost.ipng.nl $ host -t AAAA mailhost.ipng.nl mailhost.ipng.nl IPv6 address 2001:7b8:2:0:290:27ff:fe0c:5c5e $ host -t AAAA hog.ipng.nl hog.ipng.nl IPv6 address 2001:7b8:3:51:203:47ff:fe73:1f0f Kind regards, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From john@sixgirls.org Fri Apr 12 22:57:04 2002 From: john@sixgirls.org (John Klos) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 17:57:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > please remove from list > > Rod L. Martin > Sr. Network Engineer You're a senior network engineer and you can't figure out how to unsubscribe yourself? From rain@bluecherry.net Fri Apr 12 23:24:21 2002 From: rain@bluecherry.net (Ben Winslow) Date: 12 Apr 2002 17:24:21 -0500 Subject: How to =?ISO-8859-1?Q?unsubscribe=2FC=F3mo?= al irse/Comment partir/Come andare/Como sair Message-ID: <1018650261.7782.76.camel@halcyon> --=-05rJn4IEOL3zLHC0hBJI Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-vvzstXPUiUUspfzmULt4" --=-vvzstXPUiUUspfzmULt4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Here again is the message from George Mitchell (since I'm too lazy to write something original right now) since it's apparently needed once again (along with poor translations since I don't think English is the first language for some of these people.) If any native speaker of one of these languages (or of another language altogether) wants to mail me a (better) translation, I'll put them all together in a generic message that we can either send to people or point them to, since it seems that there's once again a problem with people being subscribed who don't wish to be. ----- It's not clear why so many people are trying to leave the mailing list, but let me post this reminder, which you all got when you first subscribed to the list: If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send the following command in email to "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu": unsubscribe Or you can send mail to "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" with the following command in the body of your email message: unsubscribe 6bone ----- No est=E1 claro porqu=E9 tan mucha gente est=E1 intentando dejar la lista e= l enviar, pero me dej=F3 fijar este recordatorio, que usted consigui=F3 todo cuando usted primero suscribi=F3 a la lista: Si usted desea siempre quitarse de esta lista el enviar, env=EDe el comando siguiente en el email a "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu":=20 unsubscribe O usted puede enviar el correo a "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" con el comando siguiente en el cuerpo de su mensaje del email: unsubscribe 6bone ----- Il n'est pas clair pourquoi tant de personnes essayent de laisser la liste d'exp=E9dition, mais m'a laiss=E9 signaler ce rappel, que vous avez tout obtenu quand vous avez souscrit la premi=E8re fois =E0 la liste: Si vous voulez jamais vous enlever de cette liste d'exp=E9dition, envoyez la commande suivante dans l'email =E0 "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu": =20 unsubscribe Ou vous peut envoyer le courrier =E0 "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" avec la commande suivante dans le corps de votre message d'email: unsubscribe 6bone ----- Non =E8 chiaro perch=E8 tanta gente sta provando a lasciare la lista spedire, ma lo ha lasciato inviare questo ricordo, che interamente avete ottenuto quando in primo luogo vi siete abbonati alla lista: Se desiderate mai rimuoversi da questa lista spedire, trasmetta il seguente ordine in email a "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu": unsubscribe O voi pu=F2 trasmettere la posta a "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" con il seguente ordine nel corpo del vostro messaggio del email: unsubscribe 6bone ----- N=E3o est=E1 desobstru=EDdo porque assim muitos povos est=E3o tentando deix= ar a lista enviar, mas deixa-me afixar este lembrete, que voc=EA come=E7ou toda quando voc=EA subscreveu primeiramente =E0 lista: Se voc=EA quiser sempre se remover desta lista enviar, emita o seguinte comando no email a "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu": unsubscribe Ou voc=EA podem emitir o correio a "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" com o seguinte comando no corpo de sua mensagem do email: unsubscribe 6bone --=20 Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : Anyone who is capable of getting=20 System Administrator : themselves made President should=20 Bluecherry Internet Services : on no account be allowed to do http://www.bluecherry.net/ : the job. -- THGTTG =20 (573) 592-0800 :=20 --=-vvzstXPUiUUspfzmULt4 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="=-K/49GzW6xbNTb9BE9B5x" Content-Description: Forwarded messages --=-K/49GzW6xbNTb9BE9B5x Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: Forwarded message - How to remove yourself from the list Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: <6bone-owner@ISI.EDU> Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by spock.bluecherry.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id WAA26994 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:07:47 -0600 Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA01004 for 6bone-outgoing; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:08:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA00999 for <6bone@zephyr.isi.edu>; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:08:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from hafnium.mcis.singnet.com.sg (hafnium.singnet.com.sg [165.21.74.90]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g1118Cg02813 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 17:08:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail pickup service by hafnium.mcis.singnet.com.sg with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 09:08:07 +0800 Received: from mx13.singnet.com.sg ([165.21.74.113]) by hafnium.mcis.singnet.com.sg with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.687.68); Fri, 1 Feb 2002 05:23:52 +0800 Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by mx13.singnet.com.sg (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g0VLNn3K019296; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 05:23:50 +0800 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA22724 for 6bone-outgoing; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA22719 for <6bone@zephyr.isi.edu>; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from southstation.m5p.com (dsl-209-162-215-52.easystreet.com [209.162.215.52]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g0VL4sg09559 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from m5p.com (parkstreet [10.100.0.1]) by southstation.m5p.com (8.12.1/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g0VL4mKO062300 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-DSS-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=OK) for <6bone@isi.edu>; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:49 -0800 (PST) Received: (from george@localhost) by m5p.com (8.12.1/8.12.1/Submit) id g0VL4lcf062297; Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 13:04:47 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200201312104.g0VL4lcf062297@m5p.com> From: george+6bone@m5p.com To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: How to remove yourself from the list Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU Precedence: bulk X-SpamBouncer: 1.4 (10/07/01) X-SBNote: FROM_DAEMON/Listserv X-SBRule: Pattern Match (Disclaimer) (Score: 600) X-SBPass: No Freemail Filtering X-SBClass: Blocked Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It's not clear why so many people are trying to leave the mailing list, but let me post this reminder, which you all got when you first subscribed to the list: If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send the following command in email to "6bone-request@zephyr.isi.edu": unsubscribe Or you can send mail to "majordomo@zephyr.isi.edu" with the following comma= nd in the body of your email message: unsubscribe 6bone -- George Mitchell --=-K/49GzW6xbNTb9BE9B5x Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: Forwarded message - The welcome message Content-Type: message/rfc822 Return-Path: <6bone-owner@ISI.EDU> Received: from zephyr.isi.edu (zephyr.isi.edu [128.9.160.160]) by spock.bluecherry.net (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id JAA30568 for ; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 09:33:33 -0600 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id EAA21245 for 6bone-outgoing; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 04:39:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from tnt.isi.edu (tnt.isi.edu [128.9.128.128]) by zephyr.isi.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA21240 for <6bone@zephyr.isi.edu>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 04:38:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from zed.isi.edu (zed.isi.edu [128.9.160.57]) by tnt.isi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g11Ccvg03373 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 04:38:57 -0800 (PST) Received: (from bmanning@localhost) by zed.isi.edu (8.11.6/8.11.1) id g11Ccvc07708 for 6bone@isi.edu; Fri, 1 Feb 2002 04:38:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bmanning) Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 04:38:57 -0800 From: Bill Manning To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: The welcome message Message-ID: <20020201123857.GJ5977@zed.isi.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU Precedence: bulk X-SpamBouncer: 1.4 (10/07/01) X-SBNote: FROM_DAEMON/Listserv X-SBPass: No Freemail Filtering X-SBClass: Bulk Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Welcome to the 6bone mailing list! If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, send the following command in email to "6bone-request@isi.edu": unsubscribe Or you can send mail to "majordomo@isi.edu" with the following command in the body of your email message: unsubscribe 6bone -------------------------------------------------------- There is a relay in singapore that I -think- has been squashed. There might be another one that is still being investigated. thanks for you patience --bill --=-K/49GzW6xbNTb9BE9B5x-- --=-vvzstXPUiUUspfzmULt4-- --=-05rJn4IEOL3zLHC0hBJI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQA8t16V2/SfDQAyrVERAo6JAJ93r+j5Xf3jnyCOIRHzyo0chsc7AgCeIzgI lioBnXoYPfHnjqOmxnI0KHg= =+5ju -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-05rJn4IEOL3zLHC0hBJI-- From mrz@intelenet.net Sat Apr 13 00:59:37 2002 From: mrz@intelenet.net (matthew zeier) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:59:37 -0700 Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel Message-ID: <04d801c1e27e$1a398b20$7a180a0a@MRZTP> I've been trying for a week to find someone to give me a connection to the 6bone. UUNET seems to be my most logical choice however, I haven't heard back from them since their initial "yes we can do it" email. Is anyone close enough to: ipv6-tunnel.irv.intelenet.net has address 216.23.160.133 To help me out? Thanks. -- matthew zeier - "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." - John von Newmann From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Sat Apr 13 06:39:10 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 22:39:10 -0700 Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C543@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> It would help if you allowed people to traceroute to your router.... -----Original Message----- From: matthew zeier [mailto:mrz@intelenet.net] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 5:00 PM To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel I've been trying for a week to find someone to give me a connection to the 6bone. UUNET seems to be my most logical choice however, I haven't heard back from them since their initial "yes we can do it" email. Is anyone close enough to: ipv6-tunnel.irv.intelenet.net has address 216.23.160.133 To help me out? Thanks. -- matthew zeier - "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." - John von Newmann From mrz@intelenet.net Sat Apr 13 07:18:55 2002 From: mrz@intelenet.net (matthew zeier) Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 23:18:55 -0700 Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C543@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <015201c1e2b3$173e0b50$0b16160a@Desktop> > It would help if you allowed people to traceroute to your router.... My bad. 216.23.160.12 and 216.23.160.133 are the same box. -----Original Message----- From: matthew zeier [mailto:mrz@intelenet.net] Sent: Friday, April 12, 2002 5:00 PM To: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel I've been trying for a week to find someone to give me a connection to the 6bone. UUNET seems to be my most logical choice however, I haven't heard back from them since their initial "yes we can do it" email. Is anyone close enough to: ipv6-tunnel.irv.intelenet.net has address 216.23.160.133 To help me out? Thanks. -- matthew zeier - "In mathematics you don't understand things. You just get used to them." - John von Newmann From jeroen@unfix.org Sat Apr 13 15:10:30 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 16:10:30 +0200 Subject: looking for 6bone tunnel In-Reply-To: <015201c1e2b3$173e0b50$0b16160a@Desktop> Message-ID: <000201c1e2f4$f93d5b50$420d640a@unfix.org> matthew zeier wrote: > > It would help if you allowed people to traceroute to your router.... > > My bad. 216.23.160.12 and 216.23.160.133 are the same box. http://hs247.com at the right hand side you will find a list of tunnelbrokers. and: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/IPng/IPv6_Access_Provide rs/ For some more ;) Greets, Jeroen From daniel@unix.za.net Sat Apr 13 19:07:08 2002 From: daniel@unix.za.net (Daniel Schroder) Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 20:07:08 +0200 (SAST) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020413200643.P91111-100000@unix.za.net> On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, John Klos wrote: > > please remove from list > > > > Rod L. Martin > > Sr. Network Engineer > > You're a senior network engineer and you can't figure out how to > unsubscribe yourself? > You missed the 'senior' part From six_bone@neurojacked.net Sun Apr 14 16:01:40 2002 From: six_bone@neurojacked.net (Amir) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 17:01:40 +0200 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? Message-ID: Hi, I'm interested in connecting my home LAN of 3 linux stations to 6bone. From what I've read until now, while trying to collect data to answer the very basic question of "Whether I can do this at all?" before I get down to business, I haven't seen anything that stated if my ipv4 address, which is dynamic, can be used to tunnel the traffic. Please tell me if it's possible, because if it's not, there's really no point for me to delve into the project in the first place. And, if it is possible, are there any added difficulties involved, or will it be relatively the same as installing it on a static ipv4 IP address ? Thanks, and sorry if it's a newbie question, I simply want to know if I can do it at all. Amir. From michael@kjorling.com Sun Apr 14 19:49:40 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:49:40 +0200 (CDT) Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 14 2002 17:01 +0200, Amir wrote: > Hi, I'm interested in connecting my home LAN of 3 linux stations > to 6bone. From what I've read until now, while trying to collect > data to answer the very basic question of "Whether I can do this at all?" > before I get down to business, I haven't seen anything that stated if > my ipv4 address, which is dynamic, can be used to tunnel the traffic. > Please tell me if it's possible, because if it's not, there's really no > point for me to delve into the project in the first place. > And, if it is possible, are there any added difficulties involved, or > will it be relatively the same as installing it on a static ipv4 IP address > ? > > Thanks, and sorry if it's a newbie question, I simply want to know if I > can do it at all. > > Amir. Freenet6 (www.freenet6.net) might be just what you are looking for. I haven't tried them myself, but from their web site it appears that things work with dynamic IPs just fine. You can get either a /48 or a /64, from what I have gathered (but I haven't exactly read through everything a dozen times). Just remember that you cannot do IPv4 NAT in front of the IPv6-in-v4 gateway. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8uc9JKqN7/Ypw4z4RAtAVAKDpqHkHPDWXgX9uUIvMzETACeZ8mwCdGMLC TNMmFxn7+u2cMIt8IsvvIwk= =nOHb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dave@dave.tj Sun Apr 14 20:59:23 2002 From: dave@dave.tj (Dave) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 15:59:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <005d01c1e126$923358d0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> from Message-ID: <200204141959.g3EJxTV17047@dave2.dave.tj> Nope, you're _not_ alone. In fact, you've had much more luck than I've had. I finally gave up on getting it to work serveral months ago, only posting comments to that effect every so often (when somebody else posted here asking how to get his f---in' system connected) since. I've read through every last bit of documentation I've been able to locate (of which there's no lack, if you search Yahoo!), but all of it is either targetted at FreeBSD or rc.config-based GNU/Linux systems. The Slackware forum disappeared quite a few months ago, and the USAGI folks are too busy coding to be able to offer any real help. Further complicating the issue is the fact that my Linux kernel supposedly already _has_ IPv6 (and indeed, I'm supposed to be able to ping6 ::1/128 - something I was only able to verify a couple of months ago, after officially giving up, since I happend to stumble into a ping6 binary I had lying around from a SuSE on one of my old systems; I have yet to find a telnet, traceroute, telnetd, or any other app I can use to figure out what's up with my IPv6 config, and using anything but loopback for _anything_ is basically out-of-the-question, simply because I have no clue where to start ... I'll tackle IPv6 Internet connectivity after getting one or more of my own networks working on IPv6). I also know a few others who can tell similar tales. They just aren't even subscribed to this list anymore. (I only read this list because I'm too lazy to unsubscribe - and maybe because I subconsciously hope that somebody, somewhere, someday might be willing to take the 20 minutes necessary to explain the HOWTO aspects of configuring a system to use IPv6, as well as answering my syscall-related questions (which have prevented me from writing my own programs to test out the network, thus far). To top off my annoyance, the latest brand spankin' new Linux/POSIX edition of the Comer&Stevens volume 3 of Internetworking with TCP/IP doesn't even mention the existance of IPv6 (!?!) - certainly you weren't expecting it to provide any details of programming for IPv6, eh? A rather frusterated IPv6 non-user, Dave Cohen Merlin wrote: > > I wonder if I might come in on this conversation for a moment with another perspective. > > Regardless of the location of end points, and blocks and bits of blocks it seems to me that the whole idea of moving to > the IPv6 network will die from lack of involvement if it can't become easier to implement. I refer of course to the > actual setting up of the protocols on an actual computer. > While it is of course very necessary to continue working on the outlines - RFCs etc - there needs to be some serious > attempts made to see that valid HOWTOs are produced by those who fully understand the variants. > > I take the comment from Pekka Savola in point. > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, > > Well, there are many people who are serious about experimenting, but the lack of useable information is daunting. > Mailing lists are ok for what they do - but often only confuse the issue. The documents that are available on the > internet now on the subject of V6 are nothing if not conflicting! > > The biggest pool of uses or potential users - are of course those already using IPv4. This seems to then be the obvious > starting point to use to build toward eventual take up of full IPv6. That time is of course many many years away. The > investment in training, software, hardware, plant and commerce is so great in the IPv4 area that it will probably never > be fully moved into the IPv6 area in our lifetimes. > > As I understand it, 6to4, using the assigned 2002: prefix was designed to enable the use of IPv6 over the existing > infrastructure. An admirable idea, and it appears to work well. However, the depth of documentation on the subject again > is very thin. Enough to get one host or router working if one is lucky, and precious little available to enable a whole > network. > Experimenting? sure. I've been fiddling with it for weeks now on and off. I have one host on my network working as a > host/gateway - finally - I think. and the other host on the network that I set up in the same experimental interest as a > host only is supposed to autoconfigure and connect - well it doesn't. I'm using FreeBSD which seems to be pretty common > throughout the discussions, so it shouldn't be a mystery. But of course it is. > > But back to the topic. I've been around the Internet since it was AARNet, so I'm not exactly new to all this. I'm very > sure that if I'm having problems nutting it all out, there is little hope for quite a few others. I know there are > useful things like freenet6 out there, but there again - minimal documentation, and it uses a completly different > prefix, 3fff I think it is from memory. This only serves to further confuse the issue for beginners. > > If 6to4 for a number of 'well known platforms' based on the 2002 prefix - designed as I understand it specifically to > use the existing IPv4 networks - could be documented carefully and kept updated it would server to increase interest on > a much wider scale. > I refer to the apparent ease of understanding that numbering system. 2002 is the prefix that tells everyone that it's an > address on an existing IPv4 network and probably is still being used for something useful, like a web server. The next > eight hex-numbers are the IPv4 number translated to hex of the machine that is acting as the IPv6 host/gateway. the > (cb01:6006 in my case) and the ::1 ( I Think) tells that it's the first host on the internal IPv6 network. This is where > it all starts to get grey here. Because the second host - which one would think was numbered ::2 on that network can't > be made to understand that. Any attempt to put that number on any of its interfaces simply confuses it. Interesting > though, both machines can talk to each other via the fe80:: which of couse is nothing to do > with the 2002 prefix. > > Now - I've so far received over a dozen suggestions on how to get the two machines talking to each other correctl, as > well as to the internet, and every one has been different. I have a cardboard carton full of printouts of the same. > Variations of the same theme. > > now - I'm not digressing in that discussion above. It's to point out that if it is so hard to set up an IPv6 network > across an existing IPv4 network, using systems supposedly designed to facilitate that, then no one will bother after the > first few frustrating attempts. > If the system isn't loaded too heavily, you should actually be able to connect to http://ruby.chalmers.com.au Apache-2 > install page is all, on 2002:cb01:6006::1 Now, I'm not sure if it's actually listening on the v6 port, put a ping6 to > the address should work. > It's the gateway/host/reouter whatever. > > s you can see, the origin is the HEX-MAC address of the other host. Which should be 2002:cb01:6006::2 .....OR.... as > someone said, it should be 2002:cb01:6005::1 But of course it would be if it were standalone. But it's supposed to be on > the same network as the 6006 one. You begin to see what I mean. > $ ping6 ruby > PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) fe80::210:b5ff:fee4:4386%rl0 --> 2002:cb01:6006::1 > 16 bytes from 2002:cb01:6006::1, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.913 ms > > > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their teeth into setting up any number of > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could come up with something that was > readable and useable on the subject of setting up 6to4. (and on FreeBSD in my case.) I'm happy to contribute in any way > I can, small as that may appear to the wizards of the pure IPv6 world. > > If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be able to implement it on their existing networks. > > just my two cents worth, > Robert Chalmers > Quantum Radio > > > > > > > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > > > Atlantic twice. > > > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > > - SSH (PuTTY :) > > - SMTP > > - Quake 1 + 2* > > - HTTP > > - X > > > > > > > > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. > > You've got a point there :) > > Though I think most people will profit from good latency. > > From svara@gmx.net Mon Apr 15 00:11:52 2002 From: svara@gmx.net (Fabian Svara) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:11:52 +0200 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20020415011152.4ef38467.svara@gmx.net> > Just remember that you cannot do IPv4 NAT in front of the IPv6-in-v4 > gateway. So that's why I could never manage to get freenet6 to work! I asked quite some people on #ipv6 on OPN though, and they all told me it was possible. Strange... -Fabian Svara From michael@kjorling.com Sun Apr 14 22:11:19 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 23:11:19 +0200 (CDT) Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: <20020415011152.4ef38467.svara@gmx.net> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 15 2002 01:11 +0200, Fabian Svara wrote: > > Just remember that you cannot do IPv4 NAT in front of the IPv6-in-v4 > > gateway. > > So that's why I could never manage to get freenet6 to work! I asked > quite some people on #ipv6 on OPN though, and they all told me it > was possible. Strange... > > -Fabian Svara Well, I believe that I read that it works if it is nothing but address translation (one public address is changed into one private), but that is not what I have seen the term NAT being used about. (The way most people seem to use the term 'NAT' is in the meaning of what in the Linux world is called 'ip masquerading' - one public IP address in front of more than one private ones.) Maybe that is why. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8ufB6KqN7/Ypw4z4RAjlyAKCOImftTEzOLejT/6uGF9qeHWDKHwCg9PW/ HZLUAmA3RBbG66ws0uJSX5w= =5uPo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net Sun Apr 14 23:09:06 2002 From: hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 18:09:06 -0400 Subject: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <200204141959.g3EJxTV17047@dave2.dave.tj> Message-ID: <000001c1e400$ff2f2fe0$1c52580c@who> Hello from Gregg C Levine normally with Jedi Knight Computers I just finished reading your statement regarding the dearth of luck, and successes, that you have been having, and I noticed a reference in your statements, that stood out. And I quote here, " The Slackware forum disappeared quite a few months ago, and the USAGI folks are too busy coding to be able to offer any real help.". I recognize the reference to "USAGI" so I am not asking about that. I am asking about the "Slackware forum". Who, or what was that? Slackware is indeed still in business, they are moving towards a release of 8.1 of their distribution. But you are right. When I was meandering through the whole idea of getting my Slackware system connected, I realized that I would need to use the services of a Freenet type tunnel broker. So with that decision I shelved it. So I still have one question to ask, and that one, is it. ------------------- Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of Dave > Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 3:59 PM > To: robert@quantum-radio.net.au > Cc: 6bone > Subject: Re: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 > > Nope, you're _not_ alone. In fact, you've had much more luck than > I've had. I finally gave up on getting it to work serveral months ago, > only posting comments to that effect every so often (when somebody > else posted here asking how to get his f---in' system connected) since. > I've read through every last bit of documentation I've been able to locate > (of which there's no lack, if you search Yahoo!), but all of it is either > targetted at FreeBSD or rc.config-based GNU/Linux systems. The Slackware > forum disappeared quite a few months ago, and the USAGI folks are too > busy coding to be able to offer any real help. Further complicating > the issue is the fact that my Linux kernel supposedly already _has_ > IPv6 (and indeed, I'm supposed to be able to ping6 ::1/128 - something I > was only able to verify a couple of months ago, after officially giving > up, since I happend to stumble into a ping6 binary I had lying around > from a SuSE on one of my old systems; I have yet to find a telnet, > traceroute, telnetd, or any other app I can use to figure out what's > up with my IPv6 config, and using anything but loopback for _anything_ > is basically out-of-the-question, simply because I have no clue where > to start ... I'll tackle IPv6 Internet connectivity after getting one > or more of my own networks working on IPv6). > > I also know a few others who can tell similar tales. They just aren't > even subscribed to this list anymore. (I only read this list because I'm > too lazy to unsubscribe - and maybe because I subconsciously hope that > somebody, somewhere, someday might be willing to take the 20 minutes > necessary to explain the HOWTO aspects of configuring a system to use > IPv6, as well as answering my syscall-related questions (which have > prevented me from writing my own programs to test out the network, > thus far). > > To top off my annoyance, the latest brand spankin' new Linux/POSIX > edition of the Comer&Stevens volume 3 of Internetworking with TCP/IP > doesn't even mention the existance of IPv6 (!?!) - certainly you weren't > expecting it to provide any details of programming for IPv6, eh? > > A rather frusterated IPv6 non-user, > Dave Cohen > > > Merlin wrote: > > > > I wonder if I might come in on this conversation for a moment with another > perspective. > > > > Regardless of the location of end points, and blocks and bits of blocks it seems to > me that the whole idea of moving to > > the IPv6 network will die from lack of involvement if it can't become easier to > implement. I refer of course to the > > actual setting up of the protocols on an actual computer. > > While it is of course very necessary to continue working on the outlines - RFCs > etc - there needs to be some serious > > attempts made to see that valid HOWTOs are produced by those who fully > understand the variants. > > > > I take the comment from Pekka Savola in point. > > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, > > > > Well, there are many people who are serious about experimenting, but the lack of > useable information is daunting. > > Mailing lists are ok for what they do - but often only confuse the issue. The > documents that are available on the > > internet now on the subject of V6 are nothing if not conflicting! > > > > The biggest pool of uses or potential users - are of course those already using > IPv4. This seems to then be the obvious > > starting point to use to build toward eventual take up of full IPv6. That time is of > course many many years away. The > > investment in training, software, hardware, plant and commerce is so great in the > IPv4 area that it will probably never > > be fully moved into the IPv6 area in our lifetimes. > > > > As I understand it, 6to4, using the assigned 2002: prefix was designed to enable > the use of IPv6 over the existing > > infrastructure. An admirable idea, and it appears to work well. However, the depth > of documentation on the subject again > > is very thin. Enough to get one host or router working if one is lucky, and precious > little available to enable a whole > > network. > > Experimenting? sure. I've been fiddling with it for weeks now on and off. I have > one host on my network working as a > > host/gateway - finally - I think. and the other host on the network that I set up in > the same experimental interest as a > > host only is supposed to autoconfigure and connect - well it doesn't. I'm using > FreeBSD which seems to be pretty common > > throughout the discussions, so it shouldn't be a mystery. But of course it is. > > > > But back to the topic. I've been around the Internet since it was AARNet, so I'm > not exactly new to all this. I'm very > > sure that if I'm having problems nutting it all out, there is little hope for quite a > few others. I know there are > > useful things like freenet6 out there, but there again - minimal documentation, and > it uses a completly different > > prefix, 3fff I think it is from memory. This only serves to further confuse the issue > for beginners. > > > > If 6to4 for a number of 'well known platforms' based on the 2002 prefix - designed > as I understand it specifically to > > use the existing IPv4 networks - could be documented carefully and kept updated > it would server to increase interest on > > a much wider scale. > > I refer to the apparent ease of understanding that numbering system. 2002 is the > prefix that tells everyone that it's an > > address on an existing IPv4 network and probably is still being used for something > useful, like a web server. The next > > eight hex-numbers are the IPv4 number translated to hex of the machine that is > acting as the IPv6 host/gateway. the > > (cb01:6006 in my case) and the ::1 ( I Think) tells that it's the first host on the > internal IPv6 network. This is where > > it all starts to get grey here. Because the second host - which one would think was > numbered ::2 on that network can't > > be made to understand that. Any attempt to put that number on any of its > interfaces simply confuses it. Interesting > > though, both machines can talk to each other via the fe80: address>: which of couse is nothing to do > > with the 2002 prefix. > > > > Now - I've so far received over a dozen suggestions on how to get the two > machines talking to each other correctl, as > > well as to the internet, and every one has been different. I have a cardboard carton > full of printouts of the same. > > Variations of the same theme. > > > > now - I'm not digressing in that discussion above. It's to point out that if it is so > hard to set up an IPv6 network > > across an existing IPv4 network, using systems supposedly designed to facilitate > that, then no one will bother after the > > first few frustrating attempts. > > If the system isn't loaded too heavily, you should actually be able to connect to > http://ruby.chalmers.com.au Apache-2 > > install page is all, on 2002:cb01:6006::1 Now, I'm not sure if it's actually listening > on the v6 port, put a ping6 to > > the address should work. > > It's the gateway/host/reouter whatever. > > > > s you can see, the origin is the HEX-MAC address of the other host. Which should > be 2002:cb01:6006::2 .....OR.... as > > someone said, it should be 2002:cb01:6005::1 But of course it would be if it were > standalone. But it's supposed to be on > > the same network as the 6006 one. You begin to see what I mean. > > $ ping6 ruby > > PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) fe80::210:b5ff:fee4:4386%rl0 --> 2002:cb01:6006::1 > > 16 bytes from 2002:cb01:6006::1, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.913 ms > > > > > > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about > esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their > teeth into setting up any number of > > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could > come up with something that was > > readable and useable on the subject of setting up 6to4. (and on FreeBSD in my > case.) I'm happy to contribute in any way > > I can, small as that may appear to the wizards of the pure IPv6 world. > > > > If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be able to implement it > on their existing networks. > > > > just my two cents worth, > > Robert Chalmers > > Quantum Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would not > > > > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off a > > > > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't care if > > > > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > > > > Atlantic twice. > > > > > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > > > - SSH (PuTTY :) > > > - SMTP > > > - Quake 1 + 2* > > > - HTTP > > > - X > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. > > > You've got a point there :) > > > Though I think most people will profit from good latency. > > > > From jeroen@unfix.org Mon Apr 15 00:02:17 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:02:17 +0200 Subject: Newbie starting point :) WAS: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <200204141959.g3EJxTV17047@dave2.dave.tj> Message-ID: <003c01c1e408$6f424590$420d640a@unfix.org> Dave wrote: > Nope, you're _not_ alone. In fact, you've had much more luck than > I've had. I finally gave up on getting it to work serveral > months ago, Wellps, I've changed the subject to the not very subtile 'newbie starting point'. I hope nobody gets offended by that but here we go: For linux it's all quite easy, simply read Peter Bieringer's FAQ at: http://www.bieringer.de/linux/IPv6/index.html It mentions about everything, if you aren't comfortable with compiling your own tools, you can ofcourse always use things like Debian and/or RedHat, especially Debian is quite nice as it has all the tools in it. (apt-get install traceroute6 etc ;) Oh and I shouldn't forget mentioning the Polish Linux Distribution (www.pld.org.pl/) Who have IPv6 as default and many patches for programs come from their hand! (RPM based distro btw ;) I personally favor Debian, but that's all about taste. If you want to compile things yourself you can ofcourse always steal the tarballs from the Debian servers. ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org/pub/linux/debian/pool/main/i/iputils/iputils_200 20124.orig.tar.gz or other mirrors. These are the original tarballs, so simply check www.debian.org which package contains what and leech the tarball. Net/Free/Open/*/BSD: default support for IPv6 or simply leech the KAME iso's (www.kame.net) And about getting an uplink to the rest of the IPv6 world: http://dmoz.org/editors/editcat.cgi?cat=Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/ IPng/IPv6_Access_Providers and for all the news & many tunnels providers: http://hs247.com which is a good place to start too as it has many links to all kinds of IPv6 related stuff. So where is the problem ? :) Greets, Jeroen From jorgen@hovland.cx Mon Apr 15 00:31:49 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:31:49 +0200 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? References: Message-ID: <001b01c1e40c$8cc00720$0200000a@t34> I think if your router can redirect encapsulated data, ipv6 tunnel will work through NAT. You would have to set this static, or sourceroute it... Protocol 98 ? -j ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Kjorling" To: "Fabian Svara" Cc: "6bone" <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 11:11 PM Subject: Re: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Apr 15 2002 01:11 +0200, Fabian Svara wrote: > > > > Just remember that you cannot do IPv4 NAT in front of the IPv6-in-v4 > > > gateway. > > > > So that's why I could never manage to get freenet6 to work! I asked > > quite some people on #ipv6 on OPN though, and they all told me it > > was possible. Strange... > > > > -Fabian Svara > > Well, I believe that I read that it works if it is nothing but address > translation (one public address is changed into one private), but that > is not what I have seen the term NAT being used about. (The way most > people seem to use the term 'NAT' is in the meaning of what in the > Linux world is called 'ip masquerading' - one public IP address in > front of more than one private ones.) > > Maybe that is why. > > > Michael Kj鰎ling > > - -- > Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ > Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ > PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e > > ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but > this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be > so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' > (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html > > iD8DBQE8ufB6KqN7/Ypw4z4RAjlyAKCOImftTEzOLejT/6uGF9qeHWDKHwCg9PW/ > HZLUAmA3RBbG66ws0uJSX5w= > =5uPo > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > From jeroen@unfix.org Mon Apr 15 02:12:34 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 03:12:34 +0200 Subject: Newbie starting point :) WAS: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <0f4901c1e412$ce1bd7c0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <004801c1e41a$a00eed60$420d640a@unfix.org> Merlin [mailto:robert@quantum-radio.net.au] wrote: See the end for the usefull lessranting part ;) > On the surface - again - this looks fine. Look closer and you > will see that once again in the case of the Linux HOWTO, > it's one persons setup diagram, for IPv6 and a lot of links > to stuff that everyone already knows about, and even for a > Linux person it has to be pretty difficult to follow. > and Linux users are used to having complex options. Or should I > say standards. "Standards are wonderful things. There are so > many to choose from"... :-) > And the more you read the onlline docs - because of their > wide ranging sources - the more confusing it all becomes. That all depends on how big a linux user one is. Many 'linux users' don't know how to install Linux From Scratch simply because they are spoiled with Packagemanagement systems. Or when a problem pops up they don't even know that there is a thing called google, manual and docs dir where the problems are explained.... If you want it easy use the Windows systems and click&play. Nobody said it was easy, though it actually IS easy :) > However, this only supports what I said earlier. There are no > definative documents for 6to4 working, and precious few > for IPv6 alone. There are *LOADS* of documents, check http://hs247.com > Lots and Lots of individual setups granted. For individual > OSs like Linux, FreeBSD and so on. But precious little of a > broader nature such as is produced in the O.Reily books for example. www.amazon.com and numberous others sport many IPv6 related books also the HOWTO supplied by Peter Bieringer should be more then sufficient. > I would have thought that 6bone ORG would have a repository > of definitive work, being the initiatiors of the whole deal > ( are they?) I may be wrong. Google and other search engines are always up to date on this matter :) > But of course there is still the good old two tier structure > that we have always had. The Wizards who thought up the > whole thing, and don't even recognize the existence of lesser > mortals let alone write something they can understand, and > us - the lesser mortals. "Wizards" prefer RFC's and digging around in the source code. > Because of the lack of centrality to the rollout, getting > simple answers to seemingly simple problems becomes a major > exercise, and I'm sure there are thousands, nay millions > even, who have taken one look, tried it and said ... holy 6bone > batman, what is this masked Ninja Turtle. > Actually, thinking about it, a Turtle is a good symbol for > IPv6 so far. It either pulls it's head in so you can't see > it, or it's won't work because it's on it's back with it's > legs in the air. That turtle you are mentioning is the KAME (which is japanese for turtle ;) Also if one isn't capable of using google I wonder if one should be bothering even thinking about trying out new things.... > A case in point. I'm not looking for any new answers here by > the way - I have already received 32, all different. Just > givng an example. > > I set up a router on a FreeBSD box using the 6to4 setups. > Prefix 2002 and all that. It appeared to work fine. Talkd to > anything about the place with ping6 and so on. That took the > best part of three weeks on and off to master. I wasn't on > it all the time of course, I do have a living to make. > OK, got that working. I read in some docs... > To get a client on the same network working, and talking to > the router, and other hosts on the network, 'just set IPv6 > Enable="YES"' > Yea - right. > The only way it talks to the router, or the router to it, is > through the fe80+MAC address of the ethernet card > interface. > Asking the questions: Well DUH ... you need to enable IPv6 forwarding and advertise a /64 out of your 6to4 /48 on your local network. (See the IPv6 HOWTO :) man radvd (Linux) man rtadvd (*BSD) > Ok, like I said. I do not want answers to the above emailed > to me. My point is that there should be answers somewhere on > the site of whoever it was that IMPLEMENTED the 2002 prefix > idea in the first place perhaps. The same for IPv6 and any > other of the things to do with IPv6. READ THE RFC. And it's quite common sense to do it this way. > Even on 6bone, there is no "dictionary". Here's a good example. There is it's called google and www.faqs.org containing the RFC's. > 2002: The prefix used by the 6to4 set of connection > methods. Use this if you are setting up your own config based > 6to4 setup and already have your own IPv4 network, or static address. 6to4 is a transition method, not a connection method. > 3ffe: (I think) The prefix used if you connect via > a 6to4 tunnel broker, such as freenet6. 3ffe:/16 is the 6bone delegation (see www.6bone.org) > Tunnel Broker A service provider who will dynamically > allocate you an address in the above space. See [here] to > configure other hosts on your netwrok with matching > addresses, so you can have your whole netwrok of IPv4 machines also > using the IPv6 or the IPv4 network at will. Most "Tunnel brokers" supply either/and/or: - native IPv6 - 6to4 - 6over4 - shipworm And most of them will not do this "dynamically". Also most of these TB's have detailed instructions on how things work: http://www.freenet6.net/howtsp.shtml http://www.ipng.nl/index.php3?page=setup.html http://www.xs26.net/text.bat?page=help HE.net says: 8<-------- To use this free service you must have IPv6 support on your host or router. If you don't have IPv6 support yet please read more about IPv6 at a site like hs247.com first. --------->8 And they also list Peter Bieringer's HOWTO :) > On your Local Machine > ::1 Your localhost > fe80::%rl0/64 Your ethernet > ff02::%tun0/32 Read the RFC's and/or the HOWTO it's all there. > Dictionary. > Part Two: See Peter's HOWTO > and put in the most obvious place. The 6bone.org site. and > kept updated. Google is up to date, indexing everything around this world. Also http://hs247.com as mentioned before or what about directory.[google|yahoo|netscape|...] aka dmoz.org: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/IPng/ Yes it's all there. The fact that some people are too lazy to even look around on the internet does exactly answer all your "problems". Some people come asking "I have a bachelor this, doctorate in this, university student at that but how do I configure IPv6" without even looking around. Google on "IPv6" for a moment: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&querytime=y64xwB&q=IPv6 <--- this will show you the results which are: http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/IPng/?tc =1 <-- the dmoz.org directory. http://ww.ipv6.org/ <-- I wonder what that is http://www.ipv6forum.com/ <--- commercial forum for the industry http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/ipng-main.html <-- IETF IPng working group (who "invented" IPv6) http://www.bieringer.de/linux/IPv6/ <--- YES Peter's HOWTO http://www.kame.net <-- KAME :) http://www.6bone.net/ <-- 6bone (which is only a part of the IPv6 capable internet, might I add) http://www.linux-ipv6.org/ <-- Ipv6 on linux http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/ipv6/ <-- Ipv6 on solaris http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/732/Tech/ipv6/ <-- IPv6 on cisco http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/ <-- IPv6 on Windows and many many many many many many more.... And if you really have an unanswered question don't hesitate to ask the list ofcourse ;) When you first learned math/english//geography/biology etc you also had to read a lot. With IPv6 it isn't much different, the only difference I can tell is that it's not given when you grow up and one isn't kept by the hand learning it. Though ofcourse there are training programs, check http://hs247.com (AGAIN :) at the left for "IPv6 training" I wonder what that does... Greets, Jeroen PS: When I tried to figure it all (1998 or so), there where no howto's but some searchengine told me how to do it even then (along with the kernel and tools sources in hand :) From chk@pobox.com Mon Apr 15 02:42:31 2002 From: chk@pobox.com (Harald Koch) Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:42:31 -0400 Subject: Newbie starting point :) Message-ID: <13830.1018834951@elisabeth.cfrq.net> > For linux it's all quite easy, simply read Peter Bieringer's FAQ at: > http://www.bieringer.de/linux/IPv6/index.html Based on that FAQ I was up and running in a weekend with a tunnel from Hurricane Electric. I had firewalling, DNS, SSH, and basic connectivity (including CIPE tunnels). Since then I've slowed down, but I've added a couple of Windows 2000 machines, OSPF6 for dynamic routing, MXing and SMTP, and Apache 2.0.35 for IPv6 web service, all based on information from the web. Disclaimer: I used to be an engineer for CA*net, so I knew a little :-) about networking going into the process. I'll grant that this stuff isn't plug'n'play; nobody (except Windows XP) is ready to hand you IPv6 on a platter. You'll have to do the research yourself; I'd start with reading the RFCs and spending time with Google. -- Harald Koch From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 15 06:39:45 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 07:39:45 +0200 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: <20020415011152.4ef38467.svara@gmx.net> References: <20020415011152.4ef38467.svara@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20020415053945.GG1393@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:11:52AM +0200, Fabian Svara wrote: | > Just remember that you cannot do IPv4 NAT in front of the IPv6-in-v4 | > gateway. | | So that's why I could never manage to get freenet6 to work! I asked quite some people on #ipv6 on OPN though, and they all told me it was possible. Strange... The IRCNet (irc.stealth.net et al) has quite some IPv6 capable servers and also quite some clue in #IPv6. Only the English language, no colors, scripts, automatic crap and stuff like this, we're quite puristic on this :) Come and join in if you have any IPv6 (non-IRC) related things to discuss. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 15 06:41:43 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 07:41:43 +0200 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: <001b01c1e40c$8cc00720$0200000a@t34> References: <001b01c1e40c$8cc00720$0200000a@t34> Message-ID: <20020415054143.GH1393@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 01:31:49AM +0200, J鴕gen Hovland wrote: | I think if your router can redirect encapsulated data, ipv6 tunnel will work | through NAT. | You would have to set this static, or sourceroute it... | Protocol 98 ? It's protocol 41. And indeed, if you can instruct your 'ip masquerading' box aka port-overloaded NAT box to send all the proto-41 traffic it gets to an internal machine, then you're up and running in a jiffy. If anyone knows an OS that can do this, please reply to this mail. I think the closest would be iptables or pfw (OpenBSD). groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From pekkas@netcore.fi Mon Apr 15 08:38:09 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:38:09 +0300 (EEST) Subject: Newbie starting point :) In-Reply-To: <13830.1018834951@elisabeth.cfrq.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 14 Apr 2002, Harald Koch wrote: > I'll grant that this stuff isn't plug'n'play; nobody (except Windows XP) > is ready to hand you IPv6 on a platter. You'll have to do the research > yourself; I'd start with reading the RFCs and spending time with Google. Have you had a look at Red Hat Linux 7.2 or 7.2.93 (beta2) /usr/share/doc/initscripts-*/ipv6-6to4.howto ? Basically the configuration (on beta2) is like: echo "NETWORKING_IPV6=yes" >> /etc/sysconfig/network echo "IPV6_GATEWAYDEV=tun6to4">> /etc/sysconfig/network echo "IPV6INIT=yes" >> /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 echo "IPV6TO4INIT=yes" >> /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0 Can't be that complex.... :-) -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From will@harg.net Mon Apr 15 08:41:49 2002 From: will@harg.net (Will Hargrave) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 08:41:49 +0100 (BST) Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? In-Reply-To: <20020415054143.GH1393@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Pim van Pelt wrote: > It's protocol 41. And indeed, if you can instruct your 'ip masquerading' > box aka port-overloaded NAT box to send all the proto-41 traffic it gets > to an internal machine, then you're up and running in a jiffy. > If anyone knows an OS that can do this, please reply to this mail. I > think the closest would be iptables or pfw (OpenBSD). You can arbitrarily static NAT IPv4 (and also probably ipv6 :) in this way using Linux 2.4 netfilter/iptables. You could also do it with a Cisco for sure. -- Will Hargrave From smith.r.mark@wcom.com.au Mon Apr 15 10:28:58 2002 From: smith.r.mark@wcom.com.au (Smith, Mark - Sydney) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 17:28:58 +0800 Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the ipv6 traffic ? Message-ID: You can use freenet6 as suggested by others, or alternatively a mechanism called "6to4" : http://www.6bone.net/6bone_6to4.html As an unrelated (specifically to IPv6) alternative I've been playing with this : http://openvpn.sourceforge.net/ which allows you to set up a virtual ethernet network between hosts over an encrypted udp tunnel. I'm about to start using it to run a virtual ethernet into our lab at work, and the run IPv6 over it. As it creates a virtual ethernet, you can run any protocol over it eg IPv4, ipx, appletalk etc. Also, as it is emulating a multicast capable layer 2 link, all the standard IPv6 Neighbor discovery mechanisms work eg Router Solicitations / Advertisments etc etc ie. your local tunnel end point autoconfigures its IPv6 address with prefixes listed in the received router advertisements. Note, if you use it using a tap virtual ethernet interface rather than a tun point to point interface, the mtu of the tunnel will be 1436 rather than 1450 in the doco. Finally, the feature I like the most is the ability for it to cope with the underlying IPv4 tunnel end point IP addresses to change. Really useful for when your dial link hangs up and you get a new IPv4 address when you dial in again, or your DSL ISP changes your IPv4 IP address on you. The only requirement is to have an already enabled IPv6 native endpoint you can stick a linux box in to act as your remote openvpn tunnel endpoint, so it may not be all that useful if you are "on your own". Regards, Mark. > -----Original Message----- > From: Amir [mailto:six_bone@neurojacked.net] > Sent: Monday, 15 April 2002 1:02 > To: 6bone > Subject: Can dynamic ipv4 addresses be used to tunnel the > ipv6 traffic ? > > > Hi, I'm interested in connecting my home LAN of 3 linux stations > to 6bone. From what I've read until now, while trying to collect > data to answer the very basic question of "Whether I can do > this at all?" > before I get down to business, I haven't seen anything that stated if > my ipv4 address, which is dynamic, can be used to tunnel the traffic. > Please tell me if it's possible, because if it's not, there's > really no > point for me to delve into the project in the first place. > And, if it is possible, are there any added difficulties involved, or > will it be relatively the same as installing it on a static > ipv4 IP address > ? > > Thanks, and sorry if it's a newbie question, I simply want to > know if I > can do it at all. > > Amir. > From nanthan14@lycos.com Mon Apr 15 14:40:30 2002 From: nanthan14@lycos.com (Pathmenanthan Ramakrishna) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 06:40:30 -0700 Subject: Zebra OFPF Routing in ipv6 Message-ID: hi,how to configure and enable 3 host with zebra ospf6d? the basic commands dont seemed to work. need help on this for my research. thanks with best regards NANTHAN.R See Dave Matthews Band live or win a signed guitar http://r.lycos.com/r/bmgfly_mail_dmb/http://win.ipromotions.com/lycos_020201/splash.asp From burgess@mitre.org Mon Apr 15 15:08:10 2002 From: burgess@mitre.org (Dave Burgess) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:08:10 -0500 Subject: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <005d01c1e126$923358d0$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> <20020411223317.GI8121@pasta.cs.uit.no> Message-ID: <3CBADECA.2CF1BD1@mitre.org> We recently finished an IPSec tunnelled VPN between 3 locations using non-routable addresses, NAT, and shared secrets. The current IPSec implementation didn't hinder us, but the FreeBSD instructions we used didn't work completely right with our NetBSD 1.5.3 system. Let me say publically that the software worked exactly as needed for this 3 way VPN. We will be typing the instructions we are using as a thought piece and will forward it to the list for review and comments. Dave Burgess Feico Dillema wrote: > On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 05:00:14PM +1000, Merlin wrote: > > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually understand about esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love to get their teeth into setting up any number of > > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. If someone could come up with something that was > > Here 's the package (a perl script) that does it all for you on > NetBSD: > > ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/packages/pkgsrc/net/6to4/README.html > > Step 0: man 6to4 and read the instructions or alternatively: > > Step 1: edit 6to4.conf (basically, uncomment the relay you want to use) > Step 2: run: `6to4 start` > Step 3: ping6 www.kame.net > > Probably the same works on the other *BSDs. I don't think it get's > more simple than that. Not much anyway. > > > If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be able to implement it on their existing networks. > Well, people can and people do. We've run IPv6 only in our lab and at > home for more than 2 years now, and things simply work and I've almost > forgotten how to split a 3bit IPv4 net in 2 subnets just to add > wireless connectivity to my home e.g. ;-} > > My IPv6 (only!) home router says: > > 1 dillema@spam.dillema.net:~> uptime > 10:43PM up 359 days, 7:34, 0 users, load averages: 0.32, 0.14, 0.10 > > and I've almost forgotten were it is. I'll find it (and take it down. > snif) when I move house soon. > > We have many such homerouters around, used to give faculty members > and students wavelan connectivity from university to the home. Many of > them hardly new what a netmask was, but all managed to set up > their own NetBSD IPv6 router by following the instructions in e.g. > http://www2.no.netbsd.org/Documentation/network/ipv6/ > > I bet on some other OSes there's is or will be some button to press to > simply enable or disable IPv6 and/or 6to4, or maybe it will `just be > there'. Most people won't care. Those that do and are in the business > of setting up routers, may be required to read and follow some > instructions. Soon, I expect some router configuration protocol will > also make that unecessary for regular clients of ISPs. > > In short, I do not think IPv6 has a problem here. Quite the contrary. > When handing out 2bit IPv4 nets to people at home, we typically ended > up configuring things for them. With IPv6 saying: ``follow the > instructions of the FAQ'' typically works out just fine. > > Feico Dillema. > - Almost but not quite entirely a problem. From yasu@sfc.wide.ad.jp Mon Apr 15 20:47:14 2002 From: yasu@sfc.wide.ad.jp (Yasuhiro Ohara) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 04:47:14 +0900 (JST) Subject: Zebra OFPF Routing in ipv6 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20020416.044714.125129599.yasu@sfc.wide.ad.jp> nanthan14> hi,how to configure and enable 3 host with zebra ospf6d? nanthan14> the basic commands dont seemed to work. need help on this nanthan14> for my research. Could you give me a configuration file ? It would be better to send me a direct mail. thanks. yasu From treddington@bell-labs.com Mon Apr 15 21:35:43 2002 From: treddington@bell-labs.com (Tom Reddington) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 16:35:43 -0400 Subject: remove Message-ID: <3CBB399F.1070105@bell-labs.com> remove From chuck+6bone@snew.com Mon Apr 15 22:28:56 2002 From: chuck+6bone@snew.com (Chuck Yerkes) Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:28:56 -0700 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use Message-ID: <20020415142856.A20747@snew.com> I've been the very strong advocate for IPv6 support in Sendmail Inc's commercial packages. Unfo, the apache server that comes with it and the IMAP server do not speak IPv6 at this time. More demand (from buyers) would garner more resources for it :) I'm recalling some tool on a Sun site that could take code and basically LINT it for IPv4 only calls, offering the more generic (4 or 6) code. Anyone know what that is, or where? Quoting Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net): > Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently > using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. I'll add what I can think > of off the top of my head and add some questions that may benefit other > list members as well as myself. ... From walter@binity.com Tue Apr 16 00:35:43 2002 From: walter@binity.com (Walter Hop) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 01:35:43 +0200 Subject: remove In-Reply-To: <3CBB399F.1070105@bell-labs.com> References: <3CBB399F.1070105@bell-labs.com> Message-ID: <6455284114.20020416013543@binity.com> > remove Where is the world coming to? :( -- Walter Hop | +31 6 24290808 | PGP keyid 0x84813998 From jeroen@unfix.org Tue Apr 16 01:38:41 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 02:38:41 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <20020415142856.A20747@snew.com> Message-ID: <001501c1e4df$0eeeb750$420d640a@unfix.org> Chuck Yerkes wrote: > I'm recalling some tool on a Sun site that could take code and > basically LINT it for IPv4 only calls, offering the more generic > (4 or 6) code. Anyone know what that is, or where? Well I know Microsoft has one ;) http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/technologies/communications/ipv6/ip v6winsok.asp Cut and paste: 8<-------- Microsoft provides a utility called Checkv4.exe that recommends fixes for code that may not port properly. You can learn about the functionality of the Checkv4.exe utility by using the sample applications in the appendixes and reading the documentation in this paper. -------->8 Don't know for sure if it works on 'unix-based' socket code, but as the winsock framework is not so very different it should work quite well ;) Greets, Jeroen From itojun@iijlab.net Tue Apr 16 03:11:30 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 11:11:30 +0900 Subject: porting tool In-Reply-To: jeroen's message of Tue, 16 Apr 2002 02:38:41 +0200. <001501c1e4df$0eeeb750$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <1088.1018923090@itojun.org> >Chuck Yerkes wrote: > >> I'm recalling some tool on a Sun site that could take code and >> basically LINT it for IPv4 only calls, offering the more generic >> (4 or 6) code. Anyone know what that is, or where? it is called "IPv6 socket scrabber", and is still avaliable from http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/ipv6/. itojun From info@caladan.net Tue Apr 16 07:52:50 2002 From: info@caladan.net (info@caladan.net) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 07:52:50 +0100 Subject: bad tunnel topology In-Reply-To: <001701c1e495$215baa00$765c24a6@wcomnet.com> Message-ID: <3CBBD852.15085.11BCD739@localhost> Yes, we peer with UUNET natively. But we'd love to peer natively with other ISP's in the UK... On 15 Apr 2002 at 10:49, Greg Blakely wrote: > UUNET is IPv6 enabled. As far as I know, there is no ipv4 tunnelling, > but I'd have to verify that. > > Greg > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "Tim Chown" > Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> > Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 10:29 AM > Subject: RE: bad tunnel topology > > > > We were one of the first to join UK6X but since joining it's gone > > dead, there seems to be no interest - we never get any emails from > > the mailing list anymore and repeated requests to peer results in > > responses like "soon" or "we'd love to peer but were not ready yet", > > etc :( > > > > So unless you know different? We have cables between ourselves > > and UK6X and ourselves and UUNET, If anyone else would like to > > peer with us natively either direct or via UK6X, we have a presence > > in Telehouse, London and MCC, Manchester. > > > > We could also get connectivity to Redbus in London if req'd. > > > > Regards, > > Chris > > > > > > On 11 Apr 2002 at 9:09, Tim Chown wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > Have you considered connectiong to the UK6X run by BTexact? > > > > > > Tim > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 info@caladan.net wrote: > > > > > > > We run native IPv6 as well as tunnels here in the UK, from > > > > Telehouse, London. > > > > > > > > If we want to be able to reach everyone on the 6bone we have to > > > > use tunnels as there are not enough ISP's doing it native. > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > On 10 Apr 2002 at 20:42, Scott Martin wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -snip- > > > > > > until Abilene is able to run native v6. Soon. . . > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill (who is currently running native v6) > > > > > > > > > > Are there any medium to large size ISP's either running native > > > > > IPv6 or ip+ipv6 simultaneously? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > -Scott (who is currently running v6 tunneled :-) ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From bjorn.lindgren@pharmacia.com Tue Apr 16 09:21:47 2002 From: bjorn.lindgren@pharmacia.com (LINDGREN, BJORN [IT/0454]) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 04:21:47 -0400 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use Message-ID: The porting tool you are recalling are the "Ipv6 Socket Scrubber" from Sun. Its both binarys for Solaris and source code is available at http://wwws.sun.com/software/solaris/ipv6/, the tool should compile and run on all POSIX compliant UNIX platforms with a C compiler. // Bj鰎n -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Yerkes [mailto:chuck+6bone@snew.com] Sent: den 15 april 2002 23:29 To: Ben Winslow Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use I've been the very strong advocate for IPv6 support in Sendmail Inc's commercial packages. Unfo, the apache server that comes with it and the IMAP server do not speak IPv6 at this time. More demand (from buyers) would garner more resources for it :) I'm recalling some tool on a Sun site that could take code and basically LINT it for IPv4 only calls, offering the more generic (4 or 6) code. Anyone know what that is, or where? Quoting Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net): > Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently > using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. I'll add what I can think > of off the top of my head and add some questions that may benefit other > list members as well as myself. ... From rcarroll@suddath.com Tue Apr 16 11:52:06 2002 From: rcarroll@suddath.com (Roger Carroll) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 06:52:06 -0400 Subject: remove Message-ID: remove From karsten.haga@telenor.com Tue Apr 16 13:54:48 2002 From: karsten.haga@telenor.com (karsten.haga@telenor.com) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 14:54:48 +0200 Subject: remove (Intern) Message-ID: remove From fink@es.net Tue Apr 16 16:11:26 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 08:11:26 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for CALADAN - review closes 30 April 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416073357.0281d298@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, CALADAN has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 30 April 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === >Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 19:44:06 +0100 (BST) >From: "Daniel Austin (fxp0)" >To: Bob Fink >cc: >Subject: Re: 6bone pTLA request > >Hi Bob, > >Please find attached the new application as requested. > >*** 6BONE pTLA REQUEST *** > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > providing the following: > > >>> We have had our allocation from CALADAN for the past 3 months. > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > tunnel that the Applicant has. > > >>> Our current IPv6 allocation is from CALADAN (3ffe:8270:8::/48) which > is all upt-o-date in whois. > >>> Our customer tunnels are also listed. > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > > >>> We currently have 5 BGP4+ sessions configured via tunnels to > different providers. > >>> Our router is router.ipv6.kewlio.net [3ffe:8270:8::1] and should be > active 24/7. > >>> We currently handle all ASN details for Global Media Applications > Limited. > >>> A seperate e-mail from the Technical Director has been sent to > fink@es.net allowing > >>> us full use of AS24765 for 6bone purposes. > >>> Global Media Applications Limited will be using IPv6 development > services from our > >>> allocation(s). > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > system. > > >>> Our nameservers currently provide forward and reverse DNS for: > >>> 8.0.0.0.0.7.2.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int > >>> kewlio.net > >>> These should be able to be queried from anywhere. > > d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > > >>> Our (simple) IPv6 services page is http://www.ipv6.kewlio.net/ > >>> This is both IPv4 and IPv6 reachable. This server is > ping/traceroute-able from the 6bone 24/7. > >>> You can also reach our 4th nameserver (ns4.kewlio.net) via the 6bone. > > 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > This MUST include the following: > > >>> Although we are a relatively new company, we have every intention to > provide IPv6 services alongside our existing > >>> IPv4 services. We have been running as a sole-trader for the past > year, and business has increased significantly > >>> during the past few months. There is a lot of interest in the IPv6 > support of our servers and services. > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > for the pTLA applicant. > > >>> DJA97-6BONE and TEI122-6BONE - both present in "KEWLIO" ipv6-site in > whois. > > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the > ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > > >>> ipv6@kewlio.net is our support/contact mailbox. our ipv6-site object > points to this address. > >>> We also have ipv6-tunnels@kewlio.net for tunnel requests > > 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > support this claim. > > >>> We offer server colocation / rental, also virtual hosting and virtual > servers. All services are able to use IPv6 if > >>> the customer requests. We actively inform potential customers of our > 6bone allocation and their ability to use it. > >>> We generally supply services to businesses in the Manchester area, > although we currently have customers from England, > >>> Germany and the United States. We are open to all customers in all > regions. > >>> Our new shell service has had a lot of feedback about IPv6 support, > and we have our existing CALADAN allocation in > >>> action on our shell servers. > >>> All customers are reminded that any 6bone IP's are for development > purposes and that, at > >>> some point, we will be joining production-level IPv6 within 6-12 > months time. > >>> Customers are offerred IPv6 functionality at no extra cost. > > 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > 6Bone backbone and user community. > > >>> We have read these and are happy to abide by all policies. > > > > > >Thanks, > >Daniel Austin, >Managing Director, >kewlio.net Limited. From fink@es.net Tue Apr 16 16:34:38 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 08:34:38 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for KEWLIO- review closes 30 April 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416083235.0286a920@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, My previous email should have said KEWLIO, not CALADAN, so here is the corrected pTLA call: KEWLIO has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 30 April 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 19:44:06 +0100 (BST) From: "Daniel Austin (fxp0)" To: Bob Fink cc: Subject: Re: 6bone pTLA request Hi Bob, Please find attached the new application as requested. *** 6BONE pTLA REQUEST *** 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally providing the following: >>> We have had our allocation from CALADAN for the past 3 months. a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each tunnel that the Applicant has. >>> Our current IPv6 allocation is from CALADAN (3ffe:8270:8::/48) which is all upt-o-date in whois. >>> Our customer tunnels are also listed. b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. >>> We currently have 5 BGP4+ sessions configured via tunnels to different providers. >>> Our router is router.ipv6.kewlio.net [3ffe:8270:8::1] and should be active 24/7. >>> We currently handle all ASN details for Global Media Applications Limited. >>> A seperate e-mail from the Technical Director has been sent to fink@es.net allowing >>> us full use of AS24765 for 6bone purposes. >>> Global Media Applications Limited will be using IPv6 development services from our >>> allocation(s). c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host system. >>> Our nameservers currently provide forward and reverse DNS for: >>> 8.0.0.0.0.7.2.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int >>> kewlio.net >>> These should be able to be queried from anywhere. d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. >>> Our (simple) IPv6 services page is http://www.ipv6.kewlio.net/ >>> This is both IPv4 and IPv6 reachable. This server is ping/traceroute-able from the 6bone 24/7. >>> You can also reach our 4th nameserver (ns4.kewlio.net) via the 6bone. 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must provide a statement and information in support of this claim. This MUST include the following: >>> Although we are a relatively new company, we have every intention to provide IPv6 services alongside our existing >>> IPv4 services. We have been running as a sole-trader for the past year, and business has increased significantly >>> during the past few months. There is a lot of interest in the IPv6 support of our servers and services. a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object for the pTLA applicant. >>> DJA97-6BONE and TEI122-6BONE - both present in "KEWLIO" ipv6-site in whois. b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. >>> ipv6@kewlio.net is our support/contact mailbox. our ipv6-site object points to this address. >>> We also have ipv6-tunnels@kewlio.net for tunnel requests 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in support this claim. >>> We offer server colocation / rental, also virtual hosting and virtual servers. All services are able to use IPv6 if >>> the customer requests. We actively inform potential customers of our 6bone allocation and their ability to use it. >>> We generally supply services to businesses in the Manchester area, although we currently have customers from England, >>> Germany and the United States. We are open to all customers in all regions. >>> Our new shell service has had a lot of feedback about IPv6 support, and we have our existing CALADAN allocation in >>> action on our shell servers. >>> All customers are reminded that any 6bone IP's are for development purposes and that, at >>> some point, we will be joining production-level IPv6 within 6-12 months time. >>> Customers are offerred IPv6 functionality at no extra cost. 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the 6Bone backbone and user community. >>> We have read these and are happy to abide by all policies. Thanks, Daniel Austin, Managing Director, kewlio.net Limited. -end From rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net Tue Apr 16 17:00:49 2002 From: rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net (Blechinger Robert) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 18:00:49 +0200 Subject: New version of ASpath-tree is available on line References: <6ECEC1E214F2E342814ABB1ED10E795502EFB5@EXC2K01B.cselt.it> Message-ID: <3CBC4AB1.170FC6E6@cybernet-ag.net> Hi, D'Albenzio Raffaele wrote: > Telecom Italia Lab released version 3.3 of > ASpath-tree routing monitoring software. > > This version fix some bugs and is conform > to new 6Bone prefix assignment policy. > Valid PTLAs > - 3FFE:0000::/24 thru 3FFE:3F00::/24 > - 3FFE:8000::/28 thru 3FFE:83F0::/28 > - 3FFE:4000::/32 thru 3FFE:7FFF::/32 I have an suggestion to improve our "Odd routes reports ( unaggregated prefixes )" part... ...what do you think about to do this also for 200x routes ? i currently see only 6bone prefixes. Thanks Robert -- Blechinger Robert Cybernet AG - Networking email: rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net Phone: +49 89 99315 - 116 Fax: +49 89 99315 - 199 Love is just a kiss away... From info@caladan.net Tue Apr 16 19:32:55 2002 From: info@caladan.net (info@caladan.net) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 19:32:55 +0100 Subject: pTLA request for CALADAN - review closes 30 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416073357.0281d298@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <3CBC7C67.3605.143DE0CE@localhost> Err, we already have a pTLA allocation, this request is for KEWLIO to whom we provide IPv6 connectivity... Chris On 16 Apr 2002 at 8:11, Bob Fink wrote: > 6bone Folk, > > CALADAN has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully > compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 30 > April 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > > === > >Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 19:44:06 +0100 (BST) > >From: "Daniel Austin (fxp0)" > >To: Bob Fink > >cc: > >Subject: Re: 6bone pTLA request > > > >Hi Bob, > > > >Please find attached the new application as requested. > > > >*** 6BONE pTLA REQUEST *** > > > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. > > During the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be > > operationally providing the following: > > > > >>> We have had our allocation from CALADAN for the past 3 months. > > > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for > > their > > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including > > each tunnel that the Applicant has. > > > > >>> Our current IPv6 allocation is from CALADAN (3ffe:8270:8::/48) > > >>> which > > is all upt-o-date in whois. > > >>> Our customer tunnels are also listed. > > > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and > > connectivity > > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA > > request. > > > > >>> We currently have 5 BGP4+ sessions configured via tunnels to > > different providers. > > >>> Our router is router.ipv6.kewlio.net [3ffe:8270:8::1] and should > > >>> be > > active 24/7. > > >>> We currently handle all ASN details for Global Media > > >>> Applications > > Limited. > > >>> A seperate e-mail from the Technical Director has been sent to > > fink@es.net allowing > > >>> us full use of AS24765 for 6bone purposes. > > >>> Global Media Applications Limited will be using IPv6 development > > >>> > > services from our > > >>> allocation(s). > > > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > > system. > > > > >>> Our nameservers currently provide forward and reverse DNS for: > > >>> 8.0.0.0.0.7.2.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int kewlio.net These should be able > > >>> to be queried from anywhere. > > > > d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > > providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing > > the Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 > > pingable. > > > > >>> Our (simple) IPv6 services page is http://www.ipv6.kewlio.net/ > > >>> This is both IPv4 and IPv6 reachable. This server is > > ping/traceroute-able from the 6bone 24/7. > > >>> You can also reach our 4th nameserver (ns4.kewlio.net) via the > > >>> 6bone. > > > > 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > > This MUST include the following: > > > > >>> Although we are a relatively new company, we have every > > >>> intention to > > provide IPv6 services alongside our existing > > >>> IPv4 services. We have been running as a sole-trader for the > > >>> past > > year, and business has increased significantly > > >>> during the past few months. There is a lot of interest in the > > >>> IPv6 > > support of our servers and services. > > > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, > > with > > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site > > object for the pTLA applicant. > > > > >>> DJA97-6BONE and TEI122-6BONE - both present in "KEWLIO" > > >>> ipv6-site in > > whois. > > > > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all > > support > > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in > > the ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > > > > >>> ipv6@kewlio.net is our support/contact mailbox. our ipv6-site > > >>> object > > points to this address. > > >>> We also have ipv6-tunnels@kewlio.net for tunnel requests > > > > 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is > > a major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or > > focus of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and > > information in support this claim. > > > > >>> We offer server colocation / rental, also virtual hosting and > > >>> virtual > > servers. All services are able to use IPv6 if > > >>> the customer requests. We actively inform potential customers > > >>> of our > > 6bone allocation and their ability to use it. > > >>> We generally supply services to businesses in the Manchester > > >>> area, > > although we currently have customers from England, > > >>> Germany and the United States. We are open to all customers in > > >>> all > > regions. > > >>> Our new shell service has had a lot of feedback about IPv6 > > >>> support, > > and we have our existing CALADAN allocation in > > >>> action on our shell servers. > > >>> All customers are reminded that any 6bone IP's are for > > >>> development > > purposes and that, at > > >>> some point, we will be joining production-level IPv6 within 6-12 > > >>> > > months time. > > >>> Customers are offerred IPv6 functionality at no extra cost. > > > > 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of > > the 6Bone backbone and user community. > > > > >>> We have read these and are happy to abide by all policies. > > > > > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > >Daniel Austin, > >Managing Director, > >kewlio.net Limited. > From fink@es.net Tue Apr 16 19:45:10 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 11:45:10 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for CALADAN - review closes 30 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <3CBC7C67.3605.143DE0CE@localhost> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416073357.0281d298@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416114454.0288c200@imap2.es.net> At 07:32 PM 4/16/2002 +0100, info@caladan.net wrote: >Err, we already have a pTLA allocation, this request is for KEWLIO >to whom we provide IPv6 connectivity... Already corrected. Thanks, Bob From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Tue Apr 16 22:06:16 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 14:06:16 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for CALADAN - review closes 30 April 2002 Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C574@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Bob, I doubt it is a new thing, but there is something fuzzy about the way the mailing list server processes postings. I received your correction 1/2 hour _before_ I received the original posting. Michel. From clichty@hotmail.com Tue Apr 16 22:49:16 2002 From: clichty@hotmail.com (Chris Lichty) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 21:49:16 +0000 Subject: remove Message-ID:

remove



Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here
From fink@es.net Tue Apr 16 23:48:21 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2002 15:48:21 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for CALADAN - review closes 30 April 2002 In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C574@server2000.arneill- py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020416154741.00b50560@imap2.es.net> At 02:06 PM 4/16/2002 -0700, Michel Py wrote: >Bob, > >I doubt it is a new thing, but there is something fuzzy about the way >the mailing list server processes postings. I received your correction >1/2 hour _before_ I received the original posting. There has always been a fair lag (20-40 minutes, sometimes 60) in mail coming out of the isi.edu mailers. Bob From Andreas.Koerpert@icn.siemens.de Wed Apr 17 16:52:46 2002 From: Andreas.Koerpert@icn.siemens.de (Koerpert Andreas) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 17:52:46 +0200 Subject: ipv6 testing equipment??? Message-ID: Hello 6bone folks, does anybody have any knowledge or even practical experience with an IP protocol tester (a load-generation-and-analysis-type of machine, not a sniffer) that has the IPv6 protocol implemented? Any information is welcome. regards, Andreas K鰎pert Andreas K鰎pert SIEMENS AG ICN WN OP TDC TS MC Tel.: +49-7251-73-3221 fax: +49-7251-73-3939 andreas.koerpert@icn.siemens.de From enric@satec.es Wed Apr 17 17:29:43 2002 From: enric@satec.es (Enric Corominas) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:29:43 +0200 Subject: ipv6 testing equipment??? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200204171829430920.01C82608@mail.satec.es> Hi Andreas, A few month ago we received a presentation of Spirent "Smart Bit" equipment, which claimed to have IPv6 support. Unfortunately I couldn't test the IPv6 module for myself, but the experience I have with this test-equipment in the IPv4 playground is very very good, so I expect they maintain the same level in IPv6. Hope this helps, Enric Corominas *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 17/04/02 at 17:52 Koerpert Andreas wrote: >Hello 6bone folks, > >does anybody have any knowledge or even practical experience with an IP >protocol tester (a load-generation-and-analysis-type of machine, not a >sniffer) >that has the IPv6 protocol implemented? Any information is welcome. > > >regards, > >Andreas K鰎pert > > > > > >Andreas K鰎pert >SIEMENS AG >ICN WN OP TDC TS MC >Tel.: +49-7251-73-3221 >fax: +49-7251-73-3939 >andreas.koerpert@icn.siemens.de From fink@es.net Wed Apr 17 17:45:08 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 09:45:08 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for DOLPHINS-CH - review closes 30 April 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020417093741.027f46d0@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, DOLPHINS-CH has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 1 May 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === >Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:16:18 +0200 >From: Matthias Cramer >To: fink@es.net >Cc: ipv6@as8758.net >Subject: pTLA Request for DOLPHINS-CH > >Hi Bob > >DOLPHINS-CH likes to get a pTLA allocation for the 6Bone. Following the >RFC 2772 >Sections in question, with our statments. > >7. Guidelines for 6Bone pTLA sites > > The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It > should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are > expected to provide production quality backbone network services for > the 6Bone. > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > providing the following: > >We are on the 6Bone since 9.July 2001 > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > tunnel that the Applicant has. > >They reflect allways the current state. > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > >BGP4+ is stable and working well to SOLNET-CH, and is pingable with the name >rt.ipv6.freestone.net (3FFE:8150:2001:0:0:0:0:1). > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > system. > >All IPv6 our Hosts have forward and reverse entries. > > d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > >The servers name is www.ipv6.as8758.net, and it is pingable, it has >A and AAAA entries. > > 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > This MUST include the following: > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > for the pTLA applicant. > >We have two qualified support persons, they are registerd in the ipv6-site >entry. > > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the > ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > >We are reachable under ipv6@as8758.net. > > 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > support this claim. > >We have allready interested parties. Our whole backbone will be native >IPv6 in about 4 Weeks. > >For Your information on our services. We offer Virtual Webhousing, Server >Hosting, >Leased Lines, DialUP and all other classic ISP services. And we like to offer >all these Services on IPv6. For that our Cusomers and espessialy we, like >to get >expirience with that matter on the 6Bone. > > 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > 6Bone backbone and user community. > >We fully agree to that. > > When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply > to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to > the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the > criteria above. > >We fully agree to that. > >8. 6Bone Operations Group > > The 6Bone Operations Group is the group in charge of monitoring and > policing adherence to the current rules. Membership in the 6Bone > Operations Group is mandatory for, and restricted to, sites connected > to the 6Bone. > > The 6Bone Operations Group is currently defined by those members of > the existing 6Bone mailing list who represent sites participating in > the 6Bone. Therefore it is incumbent on relevant site contacts to > join the 6Bone mailing list. Instructions on how to join the list are > maintained on the 6Bone web site at < http://www.6bone.net>. > >We fully agree to that. > > >Best regards > > Matthias Cramer > >-- > _;\_ Matthias Cramer System & Network Manager > /_. \ Dolphins Network Systems AG Phone +41-1-847'45'45 > |/ -\ .) Libernstrasse 24 Fax +41-1-847'45'49 > -'^`- \; CH-8112 Otelfingen http://www.dolphins.ch/ >GnuPG 1024D/2D208250 = DBC6 65B6 7083 1029 781E 3959 B62F DF1C 2D20 8250 > > From bmanning@ISI.EDU Wed Apr 17 18:39:00 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 10:39:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: sluggishness? (fwd) Message-ID: <200204171739.g3HHd0Y07649@boreas.isi.edu> Bill, Even though you did not give specifics about this email, I'll assume its the 6bome mailing list. If so, this is a majordomo list on and the configuration is set to check for outbound email hourly. This was to balance the load (in the old days). Since the load on has dropped, I can change this check to less than an hour. Jim > At 02:06 PM 4/16/2002 -0700, Michel Py wrote: > >Bob, > > > >I doubt it is a new thing, but there is something fuzzy about the way > >the mailing list server processes postings. I received your correction > >1/2 hour _before_ I received the original posting. > > There has always been a fair lag (20-40 minutes, sometimes 60) in mail > coming out of the isi.edu mailers. > > > Bob > > ----- End of forwarded message from Bob Fink ----- > -- This might make things a bit snappier. -- bill From cramer@dolphins.ch Wed Apr 17 19:09:10 2002 From: cramer@dolphins.ch (Matthias Cramer) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 20:09:10 +0200 Subject: ipv6 testing equipment??? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20020417200910.18495f02.cramer@dolphins.ch> --=.jc4FZuti,YjqXJ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Andreas On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 17:52:46 +0200 "Koerpert Andreas" wrote: > Hello 6bone folks, > > does anybody have any knowledge or even practical experience with an IP protocol tester (a load-generation-and-analysis-type of machine, not a sniffer) > that has the IPv6 protocol implemented? Any information is welcome. Are you looking for something lise this ?? http://freshmeat.net/projects/sendip Best regards Matthias -- _;\_ Matthias Cramer System & Network Manager /_. \ Dolphins Network Systems AG Phone +41-1-847'45'45 |/ -\ .) Libernstrasse 24 Fax +41-1-847'45'49 -'^`- \; CH-8112 Otelfingen http://www.dolphins.ch/ --=.jc4FZuti,YjqXJ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE8vbpLti/fHC0gglARAjc7AJ4ucOWNb+GNeriNWF9oiOHgwQ6s+QCfTbZr CsoT//JoVjqNK27Q0AkB0kg= =+cyO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=.jc4FZuti,YjqXJ-- From dave@dave.tj Thu Apr 18 00:33:50 2002 From: dave@dave.tj (Dave) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:33:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 (fwd) Message-ID: <200204172333.g3HNXq316670@dave2.dave.tj> I forgot to forward a copy to the list :-( - Dave Dave wrote: >From dave Wed Apr 17 19:03:46 2002 Subject: Re: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 To: hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net (Gregg C Levine) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:03:46 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <000001c1e400$ff2f2fe0$1c52580c@who> from "Gregg C Levine" at Apr 14, 2002 06:09:06 PM From: Dave X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] Content-Length: 11353 What is your question??? If it's "What is (was) the Slackware forum?" you may want to check out . - Dave Gregg C Levine wrote: > > Hello from Gregg C Levine normally with Jedi Knight Computers > I just finished reading your statement regarding the dearth of luck, and > successes, that you have been having, and I noticed a reference in your > statements, that stood out. And I quote here, " The Slackware forum > disappeared quite a few months ago, and the USAGI folks are too busy > coding to be able to offer any real help.". I recognize the reference to > "USAGI" so I am not asking about that. I am asking about the "Slackware > forum". Who, or what was that? Slackware is indeed still in business, > they are moving towards a release of 8.1 of their distribution. But you > are right. When I was meandering through the whole idea of getting my > Slackware system connected, I realized that I would need to use the > services of a Freenet type tunnel broker. So with that decision I > shelved it. So I still have one question to ask, and that one, is it. > ------------------- > Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net > ------------------------------------------------------------ > "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi > "Use the Force, Luke." Obi-Wan Kenobi > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) > (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda ) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of > Dave > > Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 3:59 PM > > To: robert@quantum-radio.net.au > > Cc: 6bone > > Subject: Re: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 > April 2002 > > > > Nope, you're _not_ alone. In fact, you've had much more luck than > > I've had. I finally gave up on getting it to work serveral months > ago, > > only posting comments to that effect every so often (when somebody > > else posted here asking how to get his f---in' system connected) > since. > > I've read through every last bit of documentation I've been able to > locate > > (of which there's no lack, if you search Yahoo!), but all of it is > either > > targetted at FreeBSD or rc.config-based GNU/Linux systems. The > Slackware > > forum disappeared quite a few months ago, and the USAGI folks are too > > busy coding to be able to offer any real help. Further complicating > > the issue is the fact that my Linux kernel supposedly already _has_ > > IPv6 (and indeed, I'm supposed to be able to ping6 ::1/128 - something > I > > was only able to verify a couple of months ago, after officially > giving > > up, since I happend to stumble into a ping6 binary I had lying around > > from a SuSE on one of my old systems; I have yet to find a telnet, > > traceroute, telnetd, or any other app I can use to figure out what's > > up with my IPv6 config, and using anything but loopback for _anything_ > > is basically out-of-the-question, simply because I have no clue where > > to start ... I'll tackle IPv6 Internet connectivity after getting one > > or more of my own networks working on IPv6). > > > > I also know a few others who can tell similar tales. They just aren't > > even subscribed to this list anymore. (I only read this list because > I'm > > too lazy to unsubscribe - and maybe because I subconsciously hope that > > somebody, somewhere, someday might be willing to take the 20 minutes > > necessary to explain the HOWTO aspects of configuring a system to use > > IPv6, as well as answering my syscall-related questions (which have > > prevented me from writing my own programs to test out the network, > > thus far). > > > > To top off my annoyance, the latest brand spankin' new Linux/POSIX > > edition of the Comer&Stevens volume 3 of Internetworking with TCP/IP > > doesn't even mention the existance of IPv6 (!?!) - certainly you > weren't > > expecting it to provide any details of programming for IPv6, eh? > > > > A rather frusterated IPv6 non-user, > > Dave Cohen > > > > > > Merlin wrote: > > > > > > I wonder if I might come in on this conversation for a moment with > another > > perspective. > > > > > > Regardless of the location of end points, and blocks and bits of > blocks it seems to > > me that the whole idea of moving to > > > the IPv6 network will die from lack of involvement if it can't > become easier to > > implement. I refer of course to the > > > actual setting up of the protocols on an actual computer. > > > While it is of course very necessary to continue working on the > outlines - RFCs > > etc - there needs to be some serious > > > attempts made to see that valid HOWTOs are produced by those who > fully > > understand the variants. > > > > > > I take the comment from Pekka Savola in point. > > > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, > > > > > > Well, there are many people who are serious about experimenting, but > the lack of > > useable information is daunting. > > > Mailing lists are ok for what they do - but often only confuse the > issue. The > > documents that are available on the > > > internet now on the subject of V6 are nothing if not conflicting! > > > > > > The biggest pool of uses or potential users - are of course those > already using > > IPv4. This seems to then be the obvious > > > starting point to use to build toward eventual take up of full IPv6. > That time is of > > course many many years away. The > > > investment in training, software, hardware, plant and commerce is so > great in the > > IPv4 area that it will probably never > > > be fully moved into the IPv6 area in our lifetimes. > > > > > > As I understand it, 6to4, using the assigned 2002: prefix was > designed to enable > > the use of IPv6 over the existing > > > infrastructure. An admirable idea, and it appears to work well. > However, the depth > > of documentation on the subject again > > > is very thin. Enough to get one host or router working if one is > lucky, and precious > > little available to enable a whole > > > network. > > > Experimenting? sure. I've been fiddling with it for weeks now on and > off. I have > > one host on my network working as a > > > host/gateway - finally - I think. and the other host on the network > that I set up in > > the same experimental interest as a > > > host only is supposed to autoconfigure and connect - well it > doesn't. I'm using > > FreeBSD which seems to be pretty common > > > throughout the discussions, so it shouldn't be a mystery. But of > course it is. > > > > > > But back to the topic. I've been around the Internet since it was > AARNet, so I'm > > not exactly new to all this. I'm very > > > sure that if I'm having problems nutting it all out, there is little > hope for quite a > > few others. I know there are > > > useful things like freenet6 out there, but there again - minimal > documentation, and > > it uses a completly different > > > prefix, 3fff I think it is from memory. This only serves to further > confuse the issue > > for beginners. > > > > > > If 6to4 for a number of 'well known platforms' based on the 2002 > prefix - designed > > as I understand it specifically to > > > use the existing IPv4 networks - could be documented carefully and > kept updated > > it would server to increase interest on > > > a much wider scale. > > > I refer to the apparent ease of understanding that numbering system. > 2002 is the > > prefix that tells everyone that it's an > > > address on an existing IPv4 network and probably is still being used > for something > > useful, like a web server. The next > > > eight hex-numbers are the IPv4 number translated to hex of the > machine that is > > acting as the IPv6 host/gateway. the > > > (cb01:6006 in my case) and the ::1 ( I Think) tells that it's the > first host on the > > internal IPv6 network. This is where > > > it all starts to get grey here. Because the second host - which one > would think was > > numbered ::2 on that network can't > > > be made to understand that. Any attempt to put that number on any of > its > > interfaces simply confuses it. Interesting > > > though, both machines can talk to each other via the fe80: > address>: which of couse is nothing to do > > > with the 2002 prefix. > > > > > > Now - I've so far received over a dozen suggestions on how to get > the two > > machines talking to each other correctl, as > > > well as to the internet, and every one has been different. I have a > cardboard carton > > full of printouts of the same. > > > Variations of the same theme. > > > > > > now - I'm not digressing in that discussion above. It's to point out > that if it is so > > hard to set up an IPv6 network > > > across an existing IPv4 network, using systems supposedly designed > to facilitate > > that, then no one will bother after the > > > first few frustrating attempts. > > > If the system isn't loaded too heavily, you should actually be able > to connect to > > http://ruby.chalmers.com.au Apache-2 > > > install page is all, on 2002:cb01:6006::1 Now, I'm not sure if it's > actually listening > > on the v6 port, put a ping6 to > > > the address should work. > > > It's the gateway/host/reouter whatever. > > > > > > s you can see, the origin is the HEX-MAC address of the other host. > Which should > > be 2002:cb01:6006::2 .....OR.... as > > > someone said, it should be 2002:cb01:6005::1 But of course it would > be if it were > > standalone. But it's supposed to be on > > > the same network as the 6006 one. You begin to see what I mean. > > > $ ping6 ruby > > > PING6(56=40+8+8 bytes) fe80::210:b5ff:fee4:4386%rl0 --> > 2002:cb01:6006::1 > > > 16 bytes from 2002:cb01:6006::1, icmp_seq=0 hlim=64 time=0.913 ms > > > > > > > > > So in conclusion - I suspect that very few people actually > understand about > > esoteric details like latency on pure IPv6 > > > machines. But I could point at a user group who I'm sure would love > to get their > > teeth into setting up any number of > > > hosts, even virtual hosts, behind their one assigned IPv4 address. > If someone could > > come up with something that was > > > readable and useable on the subject of setting up 6to4. (and on > FreeBSD in my > > case.) I'm happy to contribute in any way > > > I can, small as that may appear to the wizards of the pure IPv6 > world. > > > > > > If IPv6 is to be rolled out and not forgotten, people need to be > able to implement it > > on their existing networks. > > > > > > just my two cents worth, > > > Robert Chalmers > > > Quantum Radio > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > > > > If I was serious about experimenting with IPv6, I sure would > not > > > > > > go overseas to find someone who might be willing to slice off > a > > > > > > part of a block. However, if I was not serious, I wouldn't > care if > > > > > > all my IPv6 traffic to European countries crossed the > > > > > Atlantic twice. > > > > > > > I personally use on day by day basis, IPv6 enabled: > > > > - SSH (PuTTY :) > > > > - SMTP > > > > - Quake 1 + 2* > > > > - HTTP > > > > - X > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > guarantee that the 6bone will not be used for production. > > > > You've got a point there :) > > > > Though I think most people will profit from good latency. > > > > > > > Dave wrote: From dave@dave.tj Thu Apr 18 00:34:33 2002 From: dave@dave.tj (Dave) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:34:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Newbie starting point :) WAS: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 (fwd) Message-ID: <200204172334.g3HNYZl16729@dave2.dave.tj> I also forgot to forward a copy of this message to the list :-( - Dave Dave wrote: >From dave Wed Apr 17 18:52:15 2002 Subject: Re: Newbie starting point :) WAS: WAS... Re: pTLA request for RMNET - review closes 23 April 2002 To: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:52:15 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <003c01c1e408$6f424590$420d640a@unfix.org> from "Jeroen Massar" at Apr 15, 2002 01:02:17 AM From: Dave X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] Content-Length: 3204 Reply inline: - Dave Jeroen Massar wrote: > > Dave wrote: > > > Nope, you're _not_ alone. In fact, you've had much more luck than > > I've had. I finally gave up on getting it to work serveral > > months ago, > > > Wellps, I've changed the subject to the not very subtile 'newbie > starting point'. > I hope nobody gets offended by that but here we go: Of course I'm offended, but who cares? My goal here is to learn, and ... well, uh, yes, I guess I am a newbie :-( > > For linux it's all quite easy, simply read Peter Bieringer's FAQ at: > http://www.bieringer.de/linux/IPv6/index.html I've read through that document God-knows-how-many times (almost everybody points me at it), but it's not much use, primarily because it doesn't explain anything with enough in-depth coverage for me to figure out what's going on, and why my setup refuses to work the way his HOWTO says it should work. > > It mentions about everything, if you aren't comfortable with compiling > your own tools, > you can ofcourse always use things like Debian and/or RedHat, especially > Debian is quite nice as it has all the tools in it. I have never had anything against compiling my own tools. (I've been doing just that since before the existance of Win95, and I see no reason to stop now.) > (apt-get install traceroute6 etc ;) Oh and I shouldn't forget mentioning > the Polish Linux Distribution (www.pld.org.pl/) > Who have IPv6 as default and many patches for programs come from their > hand! (RPM based distro btw ;) > I personally favor Debian, but that's all about taste. I'd rather stick with my old faithful Slackware (even though Slackware itself no longer appears to be supporting the distro, which kinda sucks). > If you want to compile things yourself you can ofcourse always steal the > tarballs from the Debian servers. > ftp://ftp.nl.debian.org/pub/linux/debian/pool/main/i/iputils/iputils_200 > 20124.orig.tar.gz or other mirrors. > These are the original tarballs, so simply check www.debian.org which > package contains what and leech the tarball. That, I haven't tried yet ... I'll provide an update on my situation after I've given that approach a shot. > > Net/Free/Open/*/BSD: default support for IPv6 or simply leech the KAME > iso's (www.kame.net) I hate most of the *BSDs, because their totally user-unfriendly. Slackware GNU/Linux was designed from the ground up to be easy to use, which is the primary reason why I've always loved it. > > And about getting an uplink to the rest of the IPv6 world: > http://dmoz.org/editors/editcat.cgi?cat=Computers/Internet/Protocols/IP/ > IPng/IPv6_Access_Providers There's plenty of info about that topic, and I've read quite a bit of it, too. I'm quite confident that once I can get my own systems to talk IPv6, getting them to chat with the rest of the world will be a piece of cake. > > and for all the news & many tunnels providers: > http://hs247.com > which is a good place to start too as it has many links to all kinds of > IPv6 related stuff. been there; done that ... mostly links to all the HOWTOs and FAQs I've already found by other methods :-( > > So where is the problem ? :) LOL. . . > > Greets, > Jeroen > Dave wrote: From brett.pentland@eng.monash.edu.au Thu Apr 18 01:16:15 2002 From: brett.pentland@eng.monash.edu.au (Brett Pentland) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 11:16:15 +1100 Subject: ipv6 testing equipment??? References: Message-ID: <3CBE104F.8BAA18A5@eng.monash.edu.au> Agilent's Broadband Series Test System has this functionality and possibly their Router Tester as well, though I haven't really had any experience with that one. Cheers, Brett. Koerpert Andreas wrote: > > Hello 6bone folks, > > does anybody have any knowledge or even practical experience with an IP protocol tester (a load-generation-and-analysis-type of machine, not a sniffer) > that has the IPv6 protocol implemented? Any information is welcome. > > regards, > > Andreas K鰎pert > > Andreas K鰎pert > SIEMENS AG > ICN WN OP TDC TS MC > Tel.: +49-7251-73-3221 > fax: +49-7251-73-3939 > andreas.koerpert@icn.siemens.de From dave@dave.tj Thu Apr 18 01:16:50 2002 From: dave@dave.tj (Dave) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 20:16:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: <6455284114.20020416013543@binity.com> Message-ID: <200204180016.g3I0GoE18938@dave2.dave.tj> Obviously, I'm not the only one who's not exactly having the easiest time in the world setting up IPv6. . . - Dave Walter Hop wrote: > > > remove > > Where is the world coming to? :( > > -- > Walter Hop | +31 6 24290808 | PGP keyid 0x84813998 > From fink@es.net Thu Apr 18 02:26:51 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 18:26:51 -0700 Subject: pTLA request for NL-CONCEPTS6 - review closes 1 May 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020417181649.02841348@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, NL-CONCEPTS6 has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 1 May 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob PS: note that their ASN (AS12871) is listed as WB-NET which was 'WestbrabantNet' a previous name for what is now Concepts ICT. === >Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 00:33:33 +0200 (CEST) >Sender: psycho@leptob >From: rh@concepts.nl >To: fink@es.net >Subject: pTLA request > >Hello, > >Please find hereunder Concepts ICT's pTLA request. > >--- pTLA request form --- > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > providing the following: > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > tunnel that the Applicant has. > >KG325-6BONE: Kees Guequierre >RH672-6BONE: Richard Hartensveld >3ffe:8114:2000:6a0::/60 is our inet6num >NL-CONCEPTS6 is the ipv6-site object we use. >MNT-CONCEPTS is our maintainer object in the 6bone registry. >CPTS-6BONE is our Technical Role Account. > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > >We have two main routers for IPv6. There is one Cisco 3620 at the head >quarters in Breda (NL) where we peer over a tunnel to IPng.NL (AS8954). >Recently we upgraded our AMS-IX router to an IPv6 capable IOS and are >participating in the IPv6 shared medium. We have a session with AS8954 >(Intouch), AS12859 (Business Internet Trends), AS1200 (AMSIX) and AS21155 >(Proserve) over the shared medium. > > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > system. > >The IPng.NL network delegation (a.6.0.0.0.0.2.4.1.1.8.e.f.f.3.ip6.int) >runs on the following servers: >dns.conceptsfa.nl (213.197.28.3) >dns2.concepts.nl (213.197.30.28) >We are running forward and reversed for amongst others >wilderness.ipv6.concepts.nl (3ffe:8114:2000:a60:250:daff:fe36:c268) > > > d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > >Our public webservers www.concepts-ict.nl and games.concepts.nl serve both on >IPv4 and IPv6. >Also we are running an IPv4+IPv6 enabled quakeworld and quake2 server at >game-2.concepts.nl >/ 3FFE:8114:2000:6A0:250:DAFF:FE47:EE5 (With thanks to Viagenie). > > 2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > "production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > This MUST include the following: > > a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > for the pTLA applicant. > >Kees.Guequierre@concepts-ict.nl (KG325-6BONE) and >Richard.Hartensveld@concepts-ict.nl (RH672-6BONE) are the administrators >for our IPv6 deployment. Pim van Pelt (PBVP1-6BONE) will be assisting us >with the roll-out at our ISP. > > b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all support > staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify attribute in the > ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. >noc@concepts-ict.nl is the address we use for queries regarding network >operations, including IPv6 matters. > > 3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > support this claim. > >We are an Internet Service Provider (Nationwide) that provides access to the >internet to it's users through the use of Dialup, DSL and leased line >connections. >We have an established userbase of around 150.000 users and plan to give >these users IPv6 access as soon as possible. > > 4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > 6Bone backbone and user community. >We obide by all of the current practice of the 6BONE of which we intend >to become an active participant in the near future. > > >With kind regards, > > >-- >--------------------------------- >Richard Hartensveld >Concepts ICT >St. Ignatiusstraat 265 >4817 KK Breda >tel. +31-76-5221555 >fax. +31-76-5310531 From rain@bluecherry.net Thu Apr 18 05:27:01 2002 From: rain@bluecherry.net (Ben Winslow) Date: 17 Apr 2002 23:27:01 -0500 Subject: remove In-Reply-To: <200204180016.g3I0GoE18938@dave2.dave.tj> References: <200204180016.g3I0GoE18938@dave2.dave.tj> Message-ID: <1019104022.1939.1.camel@portal> --=-OiP7IcWGPkjMOoVdhu10 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 2002-04-17 at 19:16, Dave wrote: > Obviously, I'm not the only one who's not exactly having the easiest > time in the world setting up IPv6. . . >=20 > - Dave >=20 >=20 > Walter Hop wrote: > >=20 > > > remove > >=20 > > Where is the world coming to? :( > >=20 > > --=20 > > Walter Hop | +31 6 24290808 | PGP keyid 0x84813998 > >=20 You misunderstand--presumably, anyone with an interest in IPv6 (and just about anyone who knows what IP *is*) is competent enough to remove themselves from a mailing list running majordomo. These are all ill-fated attempts. --=20 Ben Winslow (rain@bluecherry.net) : In Nature there are neither System Administrator : rewards nor punishments, there Bluecherry Internet Services : are consequences. -- R.G. http://www.bluecherry.net/ : Ingersoll =20 (573) 592-0800 :=20 --=-OiP7IcWGPkjMOoVdhu10 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQA8vksV2/SfDQAyrVERAn8sAKCvsUgnExpKNmPJyyiTAJaUz+4XGACff3vM upz8n0GTOYexIy5IoWBP2Yo= =u6RW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-OiP7IcWGPkjMOoVdhu10-- From riel@conectiva.com.br Thu Apr 18 13:08:56 2002 From: riel@conectiva.com.br (Rik van Riel) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 09:08:56 -0300 (BRT) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: <1019104022.1939.1.camel@portal> Message-ID: On 17 Apr 2002, Ben Winslow wrote: > > Walter Hop wrote: > > > > > > > remove > > > > > > Where is the world coming to? :( > > You misunderstand--presumably, anyone with an interest in IPv6 (and just > about anyone who knows what IP *is*) is competent enough to remove > themselves from a mailing list running majordomo. > > These are all ill-fated attempts. Yeah, but, but ... bell-labs ??? regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ From ji@research.att.com Thu Apr 18 13:39:23 2002 From: ji@research.att.com (ji@research.att.com) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 08:39:23 -0400 (EDT) Subject: remove Message-ID: <200204181239.IAA20084@bual.research.att.com> I miss the days of clueserv... From michael@kjorling.com Thu Apr 18 21:10:19 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 22:10:19 +0200 (CDT) Subject: Thanks for all the help folks. Finally on top of 6to4 In-Reply-To: <01fb01c1e6c6$eefdfb60$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 18 2002 20:49 +1000, Robert wrote: > Finally, after much gnashing of teeth, the penny dropped. > > Now I don't know if you all can see it from out there, but our network is > now apparently "up" with 6to4. Looks fairly OK to me: > [michael@varg michael]$ ping6 cobalt-v6.chalmers.com.au > PING cobalt-v6.chalmers.com.au (2002:cb01:6005:2:5054:5ff:fee3:e3a7): 56 data bytes > 64 bytes from 2002:cb01:6005:2:5054:5ff:fee3:e3a7: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=592.289 ms > 64 bytes from 2002:cb01:6005:2:5054:5ff:fee3:e3a7: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=654.645 ms > 64 bytes from 2002:cb01:6005:2:5054:5ff:fee3:e3a7: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=566.034 ms > > --- cobalt-v6.chalmers.com.au ping statistics --- > 5 packets transmitted, 3 packets received, 40% packet loss > round-trip min/avg/max = 566.034/604.322/654.645 ms > [michael@varg michael]$ Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8vyg4KqN7/Ypw4z4RAsOGAKCz8CCrMLgZro0WWyCnP6/QE3YHNgCfZXVO JsQgBgBPbNUbslRVw4GrL9w= =tyr7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 19 04:20:28 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 12:20:28 +0900 Subject: 6bone connection in NYC? In-Reply-To: nathan's message of Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:21:51 -0400. <20020411002151.A98983@matrix.binary.net> Message-ID: <1039.1019186428@itojun.org> >I would very much like to obtain a connection to the 6bone. I am >on the Speakeasy residential network (the 64.81.196/24 one). My >connection is a 1.1M Symmetric DSL with several hosts, all for >"hobby" purposes... I'd like to be able to be respectably close >to the backbone, but have no idea what the process is. Needless >to say I'll be happy with whatever is considered appropriate. :) > >If you might be willing to pass me a tunnel, my endpoint would >be phobos.rtfm.net (64.81.196.252), feel free to give it a try >with traceroute or anything else. we can, under terms documented in http://playground.iijlab.net/6bone/6bone-policy.html. the delay is very low, however, the route traverses at least 3 ASes, it seems. if we are the closest to you, please feel free to contact us. itojun % /usr/sbin/traceroute -q1 64.81.196.252 traceroute to 64.81.196.252 (64.81.196.252), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 nyc00.IIJ.Net (216.98.98.130) 0.520 ms 2 nyc001bb00.IIJ.Net (216.98.97.5) 0.534 ms 3 abn001bb00.IIJ.Net (216.98.96.157) 6.506 ms 4 272.ATM4-0.BR3.DCA6.ALTER.NET (204.255.174.117) 9.426 ms 5 0.so-3-1-0.XL2.DCA6.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.122) 9.545 ms 6 0.so-0-0-0.TL2.DCA6.ALTER.NET (152.63.38.73) 9.809 ms 7 0.so-6-0-0.TL2.NYC9.ALTER.NET (152.63.13.10) 14.006 ms 8 0.so-1-0-0.XL2.NYC4.ALTER.NET (152.63.17.26) 14.468 ms 9 0.so-7-0-0.XR4.NYC4.ALTER.NET (152.63.18.30) 14.344 ms 10 188.ATM7-0.GW7.NYC4.ALTER.NET (152.63.25.109) 15.466 ms 11 internap-gw.customer.alter.net (157.130.50.86) 15.655 ms 12 border28.ge3-1-bbnet1.nyc.pnap.net (209.191.128.97) 14.616 ms 13 spk-2-nyc.dsl-isp.net (209.191.132.36) 22.285 ms 14 phobos.rtfm.net (64.81.196.252) 21.478 ms From yjchui@cht.com.tw Fri Apr 19 06:19:31 2002 From: yjchui@cht.com.tw (Yann-Ju Chu) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 13:19:31 +0800 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version Message-ID: <002d01c1e761$c9b7e280$26a9900a@chttl.com.tw> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C1E7A4.D76ECC20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi: I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know = where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! Thanks Yann-Ju Chu ChungHwa Telecom. Co. ------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C1E7A4.D76ECC20 Content-Type: text/html; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi:
    I have = heard that there is MRTG of=20 IPv6 version. Does anybody know where to get the software? Or, it is = just a=20 rumor!
 
Thanks
Yann-Ju Chu
ChungHwa Telecom. = Co.
------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C1E7A4.D76ECC20-- From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Fri Apr 19 08:16:59 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:16:59 -0700 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFA7@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1E772.323A5890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Yann-Ju Chu wrote: > I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know where to > get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! =20 Interesting question. Note that if the router or device you want to monitor is dual-stack, you can use the v4 of version of MRTG to query the v6 OIDs. =20 Michel. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1E772.323A5890 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> Yann-Ju Chu wrote:

> I have heard that there is = MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know where to

> get the software? Or, it is = just a rumor!

 

=

Interesting = question. Note that if the router or = device you want to monitor is dual-stack, you can use the v4 of version of MRTG to query = the v6 OIDs.

 

=

Michel.

=00 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1E772.323A5890-- From pim@ipng.nl Fri Apr 19 09:00:50 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 10:00:50 +0200 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version In-Reply-To: <002d01c1e761$c9b7e280$26a9900a@chttl.com.tw> References: <002d01c1e761$c9b7e280$26a9900a@chttl.com.tw> Message-ID: <20020419080050.GB22511@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 01:19:31PM +0800, Yann-Ju Chu wrote: | Hi: | I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! MRTG itself does not actually look at IP or IPv6. IIRC it simply reads frame counters from ports of routers and switches. However, you can make MRTG (or RRDTool) graph just about anything, and of course IPv6 is possible. Depending on your SNMP MIB (in the case of a router) or local scripts (in the case of a computer), you can let MRTG graph traffic indeed. You may want to take a look at what we've done at: http://www.ipng.nl/users2.php3 and click on a user and then on 'Traffic' in the menu to your left. Or to see Jeroen Massar's statistics: http://www.ipng.nl/user.php3?hdl=JRM1-6BONE&act=traffic groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From kristoff.bonne@skypro.be Fri Apr 19 10:29:23 2002 From: kristoff.bonne@skypro.be (Kristoff Bonne) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:29:23 +0200 (CEST) Subject: MRTG and IPv6 Message-ID: Greetings, OK. Did a 'delete' a little bit to fast; so I'll have to reply without having the actual message. Concerning the question about MRTG and IPv6. In MRTG, there is an option to run 'external' programs. In you rmrtg-config, you just add a line Target[something]: `/path/to/some/command some-parameters` (mind the BACK-quotes). The program must return 4 lines of text: - datafield 1 (usually 'in') - datafield 2 (usually 'out') - uptime (text) - name of device. So, overthere, you can use a program that is IPv6 enabled. I actually use this in another way: I have an external program that runs completely independant of MRTG (it's actually an external module of "big brother", see http://bb4.com/); which generates a small file containing these 4 lines (as explained above). In mrtg (which I use just for visualisation), I just have Target [something]: `cat file` In that way; you can have a single program that fetches some data (by telneting into the box); retrieve a lot of data at-ones; generate a large number of 'data-files'; and use mrtg/rrdtool to visualise them (by just doing a "cat" of all these data-files). I do this this way; as this reduces the load on the devices (you just do a single telnet onto the netwerk-device) and it also reduced the load on the mrtg-server (starting-up a large number of very small perl-script seams to eat a lot of CPU). Just my 0.05 of thoughts. Cheerio! Kr. Bonne. -- KB905-RIPE Belgacom IP networking (c=be,a=rtt,p=belgacomgroup,s=Bonne,g=Kristoff) Internet, IP and IP/VPN kristoff.bonne@skypro.be Faxbox : +32 2 2435122 From dave.wilson@heanet.ie Fri Apr 19 11:09:55 2002 From: dave.wilson@heanet.ie (Dave Wilson) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:09:55 +0100 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version References: <002d01c1e761$c9b7e280$26a9900a@chttl.com.tw> Message-ID: <3CBFECF3.2030504@heanet.ie> Yann-Ju Chu wrote: > Hi: > > I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know > where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! If I try to feed MRTG (on BSD) a name that only has a AAAA record, I get an error from SNMP_util.pm (cannot resolve "hostname" to IP address) - so I guess an upgrade to this module is a prerequisite. Does anyone know if the relevant perl modules are being upgraded? Dave From randy@ipcenta.de Fri Apr 19 12:19:59 2002 From: randy@ipcenta.de (Andreas 'randy' Weinberger) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 13:19:59 +0200 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version References: <002d01c1e761$c9b7e280$26a9900a@chttl.com.tw> <20020419080050.GB22511@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: <018201c1e794$258035e0$22005a0a@baby> hi there, > On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 01:19:31PM +0800, Yann-Ju Chu wrote: > | Hi: > | I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! > MRTG itself does not actually look at IP or IPv6. IIRC it simply reads > frame counters from ports of routers and switches. uhm, pim, i think he means that if mrtg can use ipv6 for quering like 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.2.1.57.0:communitypw@[2001:7b0:0:21::1] or so :) afaik there is no ipv6 patch for mrtg, but i can be wrong. perhabs someone asks tobias directly? ;) > groet, > Pim bye, --------- andreas 'randy' weinberger --------- internet system engineer, php development, sun microsystems workgroup computing expert & digitale videotechnik CompleTel GmbH (http://www.completel.de/) ------- From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 19 13:00:00 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 21:00:00 +0900 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: robert's message of Fri, 19 Apr 2002 21:35:01 +1000. <002501c1e796$65f1a350$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <5288.1019217600@itojun.org> >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 >or >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 >When referring to the particular host ? >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter you will be able to transition to IPv6 much smoother. itojun From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 19 13:04:37 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 21:04:37 +0900 Subject: MRTG of IPv6 version In-Reply-To: dave.wilson's message of Fri, 19 Apr 2002 11:09:55 +0100. <3CBFECF3.2030504@heanet.ie> Message-ID: <5331.1019217877@itojun.org> >> I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know >> where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! >If I try to feed MRTG (on BSD) a name that only has a AAAA record, I get >an error from SNMP_util.pm (cannot resolve "hostname" to IP address) - >so I guess an upgrade to this module is a prerequisite. Does anyone know >if the relevant perl modules are being upgraded? "MRTG for IPv6" can mean two things: - querying IPv6 related MIBs (over IPv4), or - querying MIBs over IPv6 transport (for any kind of MIBs). you are apparently talking about the latter. many of other postings are talking about the former. for the former, the current MRTG works just fine - you just need to specify correct MIBs. for the latter, I guess SNMP_util.pm is not ready for IPv6. you would need to use net-snmp 5.0 (now in beta track). as others have mentioned, MRTG is a very generic tool - if you invoke apps that generate one-liner result MRTG will graph it. so you can combine other tools to get around problems. itojun From berni@birkenwald.de Fri Apr 19 14:47:03 2002 From: berni@birkenwald.de (Bernhard Schmidt) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 15:47:03 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <002501c1e796$65f1a350$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> References: <002501c1e796$65f1a350$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <20020419134703.GA78698@thor.birkenwald.de> On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 09:35:01PM +1000, Robert wrote: > In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > > nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 Not 6to4 here, but this should make no difference. I'm normally using the following syntax (I don't know anymore where I have seen it) frigg IN CNAME frigg.v4v6 frigg.ipv4 IN A 195.143.230.220 frigg.v4v6 IN A 195.143.230.220 IN AAAA 2001:768:1001:1::220 frigg.ipv6 IN AAAA 2001:768:1001:1::220 Therefore I can select between IPv{4|6}-only and dualstack making dualstack default. -- bye bye Bernhard From pekkas@netcore.fi Fri Apr 19 14:53:40 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 16:53:40 +0300 (EEST) Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <5288.1019217600@itojun.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >or > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >When referring to the particular host ? > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? > > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter you will be able > to transition to IPv6 much smoother. That is true, but it may have it's drawbacks. Often, still, IPv6 connectivity is worse than with IPv4. People who are dual-stack will use IPv6 when trying to reach 'nanguo'. It may be more unoptimal yet. For conservative IPv6 adoption, I recommend the former (at least first). For more radical IPv6 adoption, and for non-production services, the latter is usually more suitable. YMMV. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" Message-ID: <017801c1e7b1$bf38e890$8700000a@consulintel.es> Hi all, I'm working in the EU IST project Euro6IX (www.Euro6IX.org), and we had very concrete plans to migrate several utilities, and this includes MRTG, and keep this one open source in the project repository. I can't give you more specific details about this one, as I think is expected for 2nd half of this year, but not concrete, and I believe we depend on the MIBs, as clarified by Itojun. By the way, we will be happy to heard about any other tools and monitoring/measurement/management tools that all of you are interested in get ported, we will try our best ! In fact another one that we are considering seriously is Webalizer. Regards, Jordi ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "Dave Wilson" Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Friday, April 19, 2002 2:04 PM Subject: Re: MRTG of IPv6 version > > >> I have heard that there is MRTG of IPv6 version. Does anybody know > >> where to get the software? Or, it is just a rumor! > >If I try to feed MRTG (on BSD) a name that only has a AAAA record, I get > >an error from SNMP_util.pm (cannot resolve "hostname" to IP address) - > >so I guess an upgrade to this module is a prerequisite. Does anyone know > >if the relevant perl modules are being upgraded? > > "MRTG for IPv6" can mean two things: > - querying IPv6 related MIBs (over IPv4), or > - querying MIBs over IPv6 transport (for any kind of MIBs). > you are apparently talking about the latter. many of other > postings are talking about the former. > > for the former, the current MRTG works just fine - you just need to > specify correct MIBs. > for the latter, I guess SNMP_util.pm is not ready for IPv6. you would > need to use net-snmp 5.0 (now in beta track). > > as others have mentioned, MRTG is a very generic tool - if you invoke > apps that generate one-liner result MRTG will graph it. so you can > combine other tools to get around problems. > > itojun > > *********************************************************** Madrid 2002 Global IPv6 Summit See all the documents on line at: www.ipv6-es.com From jeroen@unfix.org Fri Apr 19 16:02:34 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 17:02:34 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <5288.1019217600@itojun.org> Message-ID: <000701c1e7b3$4007cda0$420d640a@unfix.org> itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >or > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > >When referring to the particular host ? > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? > > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter > you will be able o transition to IPv6 much smoother. Definitely the latter one even with reverses. I do usually add something like: purgatory A 195.64.92.136 purgatory AAAA 3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f purgatory.ipv4 A 195.64.92.136 purgatory.ipv6 AAAA 3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f Reason: some programs can't be told to only use IPv6 or only IPv4 (usually -6 or -4 option). This way one can 'force' it to use either transport. I do usually leave out the ipv4 though as I don't use that much any more anyways ;) Greets, Jeroen From fink@es.net Fri Apr 19 17:36:59 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:36:59 -0700 Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020419093349.02871130@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, SSVL has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 3 May 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. Thanks, Bob === >Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 14:51:28 +0200 >From: Bjorn Pehrson >User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.3) >Gecko/20010801 >To: Bob Fink >CC: "Americo F. Muchanga" , > Fredrik Lilieblad > , > Jonas Will閚 , > Martin > Hedenfalk >Subject: pTLA application > >Bob, >Enclosed, please find an application for a 6Bone pTLA allocation from SSVL. > >Sincerely > >Bj鰎n Pehrson >SSVL admin-c >(bp2-6bone) >---------------------------- > > The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It > > should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are > > expected to provide production quality backbone network services for > > the 6Bone. > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > > providing the following: > > > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > > tunnel that the Applicant has. > >Our ipv6 site SSVL (AS8973) is registered with RIPE and the 6bone registry >since 1999-06-05. We are currently connected to the following pTLAs >- SICS (peering via BGP4+) >- FreeNet (static route) >When upgraded to pTLA, we will continue peering with these pTLAs and add a >few more, including Sunet, the Swedish academic netwok provider. > > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > >Our BGP4+ is stable running on our Cisco 7513 router at >kth-gateway-loopback0.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:6::1 > > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > > system. > >We have AAAA and ipv6.int for all our ipv6 hosts and networks at >ns.ssvl.kth.se. Another host is the webserver www-v6.ssvl.kth.se > > >d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > >providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > >Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > >www-v6.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:5::1 > > >2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > >"production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > >provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > >Statement: We hereby claim that we have the ability and intent to >provide production quality 6Bone backbone service. > > >This MUST include the following: > > > >a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > >person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > >for the pTLA applicant. > >The following persons are listed under MNT-SSVL >- Fredrik Lilieblad >- Bj鰎n Pehrson >- Jonas Will閚 > > >b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all > >support staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify > >attribute in the ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > >The mailinglist noc@ssvl.kth.se includes >- Fredrik Lilieblad >- Bj鰎n Pehrson >- Jonas Will閚 > > >3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > >would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > >major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > >of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > >support this claim. > >KTH is a leading academic research organization in the Internetworking >area conducting long term research on the next generation networks. Our >current research program includes the next generation network topology and >scalability, interdomain issues, support for mobility, multicast and >QoS, security, privacy, etc. The SSVL group provides regional, national >and global testbeds for experimental research also for other >organizations. We also provide an operator-neutral access network in the >Greater Stockholm area. > >Our current user community (pingable now)includes >- The IT-University, Stockholm, 3ffe:200:15:44::1, native link, routing >via rip >- Stanford University, ssvl.stanford.edu 3ffe:200:15:802:240:5ff:fea2:242b >native link, routing via rip >- stockholmopen.net 3ffe:200:15:3:a00:02ff:fe9c:62b3, native link, routing >via rip > >Users being connected >- University Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, dzowo.uem.mz, >(3ffe:200:15:60::1)tunnel and static route >- Tallin Technical University (), native link, routing via rip >- imit.kth.se (), native link >- kistaip.net (), native link >- networks connected to the Solix IXP (www.sol-ix.com) that request >transit to the 6Bone backbone for R&D purposes. >- scint.org () >- lanman2002.org >- lanman2002.net > > >4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > >operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > >application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > >operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > >6Bone backbone and user community. > >We commit to abide by the 6Bone operational rules and policies, current >and future. > > > When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply > > to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to > > the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the > > criteria above. > >We commit to provide the necessary information requested by the 6Bone >Operations Group. > > > 8. 6Bone Operations Group > > > > The 6Bone Operations Group is the group in charge of monitoring and > > policing adherence to the current rules. Membership in the 6Bone > > Operations Group is mandatory for, and restricted to, sites connected > > to the 6Bone. > > > > The 6Bone Operations Group is currently defined by those members of > > the existing 6Bone mailing list who represent sites participating in > > the 6Bone. Therefore it is incumbent on relevant site contacts to > > join the 6Bone mailing list. Instructions on how to join the list > > are maintained on the 6Bone web site at < http://www.6bone.net>. > >All three persons mentioned above are memmbers of the list 6bone@isi.edu >and are prepared to join additional lists if required to fulfill this >commitment > >Sincerely > >Bjorn Pehrson >SSVL admin-c From jeroen@unfix.org Fri Apr 19 17:53:43 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 18:53:43 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001101c1e7c2$c46416d0$420d640a@unfix.org> Pekka Savola wrote: > On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > > >or > > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > > >When referring to the particular host ? > > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? > > > > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter > you will be able > > to transition to IPv6 much smoother. > > That is true, but it may have it's drawbacks. Often, still, IPv6 > connectivity is worse than with IPv4. People who are > dual-stack will use IPv6 when trying to reach 'nanguo'. It may be more unoptimal yet. Sorry to say it but I really think it's a load of B.S.... in my opinion anyways. Most hosts I 'use' most of they day and that are IPv6 connected are as close as when I would use IPv4. I use IPv6 transparently fortunatly so I usually don't even notice the difference between IPv6 and IPv4. Remote hosts (non-european :) though are flaky sometimes. Certainly this would improve very much when all those tunnels crossing multiple AS's dissappear, it will take some time but it will come one day ;) Ofcourse I am fortunatly on the cool side of the pond and we do actually get native uplinks here. Even though my first hop isn't ready yet, it's only 1 hop, 20ms in IPv4 and 20ms in IPv6. KAME is about 300ms 'away' from Holland most of the times in both IPv4 and IPv6, so I wonder why IPv6 has 'drawbacks' over IPv4. > For conservative IPv6 adoption, I recommend the former (at least first). > For more radical IPv6 adoption, and for non-production services, the > latter is usually more suitable. The second is certainly production capable. Why should it be "non-production" anyways. Okay 6bone isn't 'production quality' maybe as it's ofcourse testing grounds, but IPv6 is. PS: Check http://isoc.nl/activ/2002-Masterclass-IETF-IPv6.htm for a great presentation given by Steve Deering in Amsterdam yesterday at the WTCW (AMS-IX grounds). Slide 50 shows a pragmatic projection of IPv6 deployment with the US tagging behind Asia for about 2.5 years and 1.5 years behind Europe! I sure hope that changes quite soon over there. Greets, Jeroen From jeroen@unfix.org Fri Apr 19 20:04:54 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 21:04:54 +0200 Subject: IPv6 Address Oracle & Message-ID: <003301c1e7d5$17420ee0$420d640a@unfix.org> Boo, Unfortunatly the NLA/SLA stuff is almost out of the ballpark again otherwise the following URL would have made a nice 'learner': http://steinbeck.ucs.indiana.edu:47401/oracle.html?v6=3ffe:8114:2000:240 :290:27ff:fe24:c19f And for the folks that missed out on the ISOC Masterclass presented perfectly by Steve Deering yesterday, check the powerpoint sheets at: http://isoc.nl/activ/2002-Masterclass-IETF-IPv6.htm IMHO it's a good roundup of most IPv6 work, where we are and where we will be going to as well as a nice introduction to people starting out. Greets, Jeroen From itojun@iijlab.net Sat Apr 20 03:15:53 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 11:15:53 +0900 Subject: IPv6 Address Oracle & In-Reply-To: jeroen's message of Fri, 19 Apr 2002 21:04:54 +0200. <003301c1e7d5$17420ee0$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <10532.1019268953@itojun.org> >And for the folks that missed out on the ISOC Masterclass presented >perfectly by Steve Deering yesterday, check the powerpoint sheets at: >http://isoc.nl/activ/2002-Masterclass-IETF-IPv6.htm are there an html + png (or gif or whatever), or pdf version of the slides? i don't have any powerpoint around here... itojun From tony@lava.net Sat Apr 20 04:08:32 2002 From: tony@lava.net (Antonio Querubin) Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 17:08:32 -1000 (HST) Subject: IPv6 Address Oracle & In-Reply-To: <10532.1019268953@itojun.org> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > are there an html + png (or gif or whatever), or pdf version of the > slides? i don't have any powerpoint around here... StarOffice will open the PPT file. From pekkas@netcore.fi Sat Apr 20 13:26:49 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 15:26:49 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20020419093349.02871130@imap2.es.net> Message-ID: Hello! Absolute no! There are two no's here: 1) SUNET already has a block, and it should assign a part to KTH ==> KTH applying for s/pTLA would be wrong 2) KTH should get a block and it should assign a part to SSVL. ==> SSVL applying for s/pTLA would be *double* wrong. We do *not* want to get down the road where facilities of universities apply for s/pTLA's. Based on current knowledge, this pTLA request MUST BE rejected or else RFC2772 will need SERIOUS rewording. On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Bob Fink wrote: > 6bone Folk, > > SSVL has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully > compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 3 May > 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Bob > === > >Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 14:51:28 +0200 > >From: Bjorn Pehrson > >User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.3) > >Gecko/20010801 > >To: Bob Fink > >CC: "Americo F. Muchanga" , > > Fredrik Lilieblad > > , > > Jonas Will閚 , > > Martin > > Hedenfalk > >Subject: pTLA application > > > >Bob, > >Enclosed, please find an application for a 6Bone pTLA allocation from SSVL. > > > >Sincerely > > > >Bj鰎n Pehrson > >SSVL admin-c > >(bp2-6bone) > >---------------------------- > > > The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It > > > should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are > > > expected to provide production quality backbone network services for > > > the 6Bone. > > > 1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months > > > qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During > > > the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally > > > providing the following: > > > > > > a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their > > > ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each > > > tunnel that the Applicant has. > > > >Our ipv6 site SSVL (AS8973) is registered with RIPE and the 6bone registry > >since 1999-06-05. We are currently connected to the following pTLAs > >- SICS (peering via BGP4+) > >- FreeNet (static route) > >When upgraded to pTLA, we will continue peering with these pTLAs and add a > >few more, including Sunet, the Swedish academic netwok provider. > > > > > b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity > > > between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate > > > connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 > > > pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone > > > Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. > > > >Our BGP4+ is stable running on our Cisco 7513 router at > >kth-gateway-loopback0.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:6::1 > > > > > c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) > > > entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host > > > system. > > > >We have AAAA and ipv6.int for all our ipv6 hosts and networks at > >ns.ssvl.kth.se. Another host is the webserver www-v6.ssvl.kth.se > > > > >d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system > > >providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the > > >Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. > > > >www-v6.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:5::1 > > > > >2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide > > >"production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must > > >provide a statement and information in support of this claim. > > > >Statement: We hereby claim that we have the ability and intent to > >provide production quality 6Bone backbone service. > > > > >This MUST include the following: > > > > > >a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with > > >person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object > > >for the pTLA applicant. > > > >The following persons are listed under MNT-SSVL > >- Fredrik Lilieblad > >- Bj鰎n Pehrson > >- Jonas Will閚 > > > > >b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all > > >support staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify > > >attribute in the ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. > > > >The mailinglist noc@ssvl.kth.se includes > >- Fredrik Lilieblad > >- Bj鰎n Pehrson > >- Jonas Will閚 > > > > >3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that > > >would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a > > >major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus > > >of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in > > >support this claim. > > > >KTH is a leading academic research organization in the Internetworking > >area conducting long term research on the next generation networks. Our > >current research program includes the next generation network topology and > >scalability, interdomain issues, support for mobility, multicast and > >QoS, security, privacy, etc. The SSVL group provides regional, national > >and global testbeds for experimental research also for other > >organizations. We also provide an operator-neutral access network in the > >Greater Stockholm area. > > > >Our current user community (pingable now)includes > >- The IT-University, Stockholm, 3ffe:200:15:44::1, native link, routing > >via rip > >- Stanford University, ssvl.stanford.edu 3ffe:200:15:802:240:5ff:fea2:242b > >native link, routing via rip > >- stockholmopen.net 3ffe:200:15:3:a00:02ff:fe9c:62b3, native link, routing > >via rip > > > >Users being connected > >- University Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, dzowo.uem.mz, > >(3ffe:200:15:60::1)tunnel and static route > >- Tallin Technical University (), native link, routing via rip > >- imit.kth.se (), native link > >- kistaip.net (), native link > >- networks connected to the Solix IXP (www.sol-ix.com) that request > >transit to the 6Bone backbone for R&D purposes. > >- scint.org () > >- lanman2002.org > >- lanman2002.net > > > > >4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone > > >operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its > > >application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone > > >operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the > > >6Bone backbone and user community. > > > >We commit to abide by the 6Bone operational rules and policies, current > >and future. > > > > > When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply > > > to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to > > > the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the > > > criteria above. > > > >We commit to provide the necessary information requested by the 6Bone > >Operations Group. > > > > > 8. 6Bone Operations Group > > > > > > The 6Bone Operations Group is the group in charge of monitoring and > > > policing adherence to the current rules. Membership in the 6Bone > > > Operations Group is mandatory for, and restricted to, sites connected > > > to the 6Bone. > > > > > > The 6Bone Operations Group is currently defined by those members of > > > the existing 6Bone mailing list who represent sites participating in > > > the 6Bone. Therefore it is incumbent on relevant site contacts to > > > join the 6Bone mailing list. Instructions on how to join the list > > > are maintained on the 6Bone web site at < http://www.6bone.net>. > > > >All three persons mentioned above are memmbers of the list 6bone@isi.edu > >and are prepared to join additional lists if required to fulfill this > >commitment > > > >Sincerely > > > >Bjorn Pehrson > >SSVL admin-c > > -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From pekkas@netcore.fi Sat Apr 20 13:38:04 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 15:38:04 +0300 (EEST) Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <001101c1e7c2$c46416d0$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: btw, I suggest you add an emptyy line between paragraphs, it makes reading easier. On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Jeroen Massar wrote: > Pekka Savola wrote: > > > On Fri, 19 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > > > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have > > > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > > > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > > > >or > > > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 > > > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 > > > >When referring to the particular host ? > > > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? > > > > > > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter > > you will be able > > > to transition to IPv6 much smoother. > > > > That is true, but it may have it's drawbacks. Often, still, IPv6 > > connectivity is worse than with IPv4. People who are > > dual-stack will use IPv6 when trying to reach 'nanguo'. It may be > > more unoptimal yet. > Sorry to say it but I really think it's a load of B.S.... in my opinion > anyways. You're entitled to be wrong ;-) > Most hosts I 'use' most of they day and that are IPv6 connected are as > close as when I would use IPv4. As do I. > I use IPv6 transparently fortunatly so I usually don't even notice the > difference between IPv6 and IPv4. As do I. > Remote hosts (non-european :) though are flaky sometimes. Certainly this > would improve very much > when all those tunnels crossing multiple AS's dissappear, it will take > some time but it will come one day ;) Sure, but we're talking about what makes sense *today*. Not in 2 years :-). > KAME is about 300ms 'away' from Holland most of the times in both IPv4 > and IPv6, so I wonder why IPv6 has 'drawbacks' over IPv4. KAME is but one site. There are others. Much less technically capable too (e.g. ones getting tunnels from topographically far away, making the latency worse). > > For conservative IPv6 adoption, I recommend the former (at least > first). > > For more radical IPv6 adoption, and for non-production services, the > > latter is usually more suitable. > > The second is certainly production capable. I don't agree. There may be differences what one means with 'production' though. Personally, if I had a power to switch on IPv6 on www.google.com hosts, I would only do it by adding www.ipv6.google.com: NOT with www.google.com. People who are afraid of degrading service and it costing real money are reluctant. An example of potentially technically capable stuff: IPv6 service of playground.sun.com/ipv6/ was down/out-of-sync some time ago.. and that isn't even a "production" site. > Why should it be > "non-production" anyways. Any client node implementing IPv6 gets potentially worse service. > Slide 50 shows a pragmatic projection of IPv6 deployment with the US > tagging behind Asia for about 2.5 years and 1.5 years behind Europe! > I sure hope that changes quite soon over there. Similar slides have been seen before, e.g. at IPv6 deployment conference (ask Pim.) -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From bjorn@it.kth.se Sat Apr 20 15:23:18 2002 From: bjorn@it.kth.se (Bjorn Pehrson) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 16:23:18 +0200 Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 References: Message-ID: <3CC179D6.6080006@it.kth.se> Pekka, Let me provide some information that may make you reconsider. SSVL is a research network, separate from the regular KTH network and from Sunet. SSVL is an AS of its own, multi-homed with international, and even intercontinental, peering. We should not be regarded as a regular university facility. The reason why we apply for p/sTLA status is that we are sponsored with research grants and a few dedicated physical links to do research on issues regarding ipv6 network topology, scalability and interdomain issues which cannot be studied experimentally unless you are active on the TLA level. We are also conducting specialized education in these areas. There is a growing demand for such research and education and I do not think it would be in the interest of the Internet community to restrict the possibility to conduct such activites. SSVL is set up to facilitate this. Neither Sunet nor KTH has a pTLA assignment. Sunet do have an sTLA assignment but is not yet operating and has not yet responded to our question about when they will start operating. SICS, who is currently our main pTLA contact, is no longer very active in the ipv6 area and we are hampered by the difficulty getting the service from them that we need. We have offered them to take over these services , and also those of their users that need more prompt responses, but we of course first need to get ackredited by the 6Bone operation group. Best regards Bjorn Pehrson Pekka Savola wrote: >Hello! > >Absolute no! There are two no's here: > >1) SUNET already has a block, and it should assign a part to KTH > ==> KTH applying for s/pTLA would be wrong > >2) KTH should get a block and it should assign a part to SSVL. > ==> SSVL applying for s/pTLA would be *double* wrong. > >We do *not* want to get down the road where facilities of universities >apply for s/pTLA's. > >Based on current knowledge, this pTLA request MUST BE rejected or else >RFC2772 will need SERIOUS rewording. > >On Fri, 19 Apr 2002, Bob Fink wrote: > >>6bone Folk, >> >>SSVL has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully >>compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 3 May >>2002. Please send your comments to me or the list. >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Thanks, >> >>Bob >>=== >> >>>Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 14:51:28 +0200 >>>From: Bjorn Pehrson >>>User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.3) >>>Gecko/20010801 >>>To: Bob Fink >>>CC: "Americo F. Muchanga" , >>> Fredrik Lilieblad >>> , >>> Jonas Will閚 , >>> Martin >>> Hedenfalk >>>Subject: pTLA application >>> >>>Bob, >>>Enclosed, please find an application for a 6Bone pTLA allocation from SSVL. >>> >>>Sincerely >>> >>>Bj鰎n Pehrson >>>SSVL admin-c >>>(bp2-6bone) >>>---------------------------- >>> >>>>The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It >>>>should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are >>>>expected to provide production quality backbone network services for >>>>the 6Bone. >>>>1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months >>>>qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit. During >>>>the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be operationally >>>>providing the following: >>>> >>>>a. Fully maintained, up to date, 6Bone Registry entries for their >>>>ipv6-site inet6num, mntner, and person objects, including each >>>>tunnel that the Applicant has. >>>> >>>Our ipv6 site SSVL (AS8973) is registered with RIPE and the 6bone registry >>>since 1999-06-05. We are currently connected to the following pTLAs >>>- SICS (peering via BGP4+) >>>- FreeNet (static route) >>>When upgraded to pTLA, we will continue peering with these pTLAs and add a >>>few more, including Sunet, the Swedish academic netwok provider. >>> >>>>b. Fully maintained, and reliable, BGP4+ peering and connectivity >>>>between the Applicant's boundary router and the appropriate >>>>connection point into the 6Bone. This router must be IPv6 >>>>pingable. This criteria is judged by members of the 6Bone >>>>Operations Group at the time of the Applicant's pTLA request. >>>> >>>Our BGP4+ is stable running on our Cisco 7513 router at >>>kth-gateway-loopback0.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:6::1 >>> >>>>c. Fully maintained DNS forward (AAAA) and reverse (ip6.int) >>>>entries for the Applicant's router(s) and at least one host >>>>system. >>>> >>>We have AAAA and ipv6.int for all our ipv6 hosts and networks at >>>ns.ssvl.kth.se. Another host is the webserver www-v6.ssvl.kth.se >>> >>>>d. A fully maintained, and reliable, IPv6-accessible system >>>>providing, at a mimimum, one or more web pages, describing the >>>>Applicant's IPv6 services. This server must be IPv6 pingable. >>>> >>>www-v6.ssvl.kth.se 3ffe:200:15:5::1 >>> >>>>2. The pTLA Applicant MUST have the ability and intent to provide >>>>"production-quality" 6Bone backbone service. Applicants must >>>>provide a statement and information in support of this claim. >>>> >>>Statement: We hereby claim that we have the ability and intent to >>>provide production quality 6Bone backbone service. >>> >>>>This MUST include the following: >>>> >>>>a. A support staff of two persons minimum, three preferable, with >>>>person attributes registered for each in the ipv6-site object >>>>for the pTLA applicant. >>>> >>>The following persons are listed under MNT-SSVL >>>- Fredrik Lilieblad >>>- Bj鰎n Pehrson >>>- Jonas Will閚 >>> >>>>b. A common mailbox for support contact purposes that all >>>>support staff have acess to, pointed to with a notify >>>>attribute in the ipv6-site object for the pTLA Applicant. >>>> >>>The mailinglist noc@ssvl.kth.se includes >>>- Fredrik Lilieblad >>>- Bj鰎n Pehrson >>>- Jonas Will閚 >>> >>>>3. The pTLA Applicant MUST have a potential "user community" that >>>>would be served by its becoming a pTLA, e.g., the Applicant is a >>>>major provider of Internet service in a region, country, or focus >>>>of interest. Applicant must provide a statement and information in >>>>support this claim. >>>> >>>KTH is a leading academic research organization in the Internetworking >>>area conducting long term research on the next generation networks. Our >>>current research program includes the next generation network topology and >>>scalability, interdomain issues, support for mobility, multicast and >>>QoS, security, privacy, etc. The SSVL group provides regional, national >>>and global testbeds for experimental research also for other >>>organizations. We also provide an operator-neutral access network in the >>>Greater Stockholm area. >>> >>>Our current user community (pingable now)includes >>>- The IT-University, Stockholm, 3ffe:200:15:44::1, native link, routing >>>via rip >>>- Stanford University, ssvl.stanford.edu 3ffe:200:15:802:240:5ff:fea2:242b >>>native link, routing via rip >>>- stockholmopen.net 3ffe:200:15:3:a00:02ff:fe9c:62b3, native link, routing >>>via rip >>> >>>Users being connected >>>- University Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, dzowo.uem.mz, >>>(3ffe:200:15:60::1)tunnel and static route >>>- Tallin Technical University (), native link, routing via rip >>>- imit.kth.se (), native link >>>- kistaip.net (), native link >>>- networks connected to the Solix IXP (www.sol-ix.com) that request >>>transit to the 6Bone backbone for R&D purposes. >>>- scint.org () >>>- lanman2002.org >>>- lanman2002.net >>> >>>>4. The pTLA Applicant MUST commit to abide by the current 6Bone >>>>operational rules and policies as they exist at time of its >>>>application, and agree to abide by future 6Bone backbone >>>>operational rules and policies as they evolve by consensus of the >>>>6Bone backbone and user community. >>>> >>>We commit to abide by the 6Bone operational rules and policies, current >>>and future. >>> >>>>When an Applicant seeks to receive a pTLA allocation, it will apply >>>>to the 6Bone Operations Group (see section 8 below) by providing to >>>>the Group information in support of its claims that it meets the >>>>criteria above. >>>> >>>We commit to provide the necessary information requested by the 6Bone >>>Operations Group. >>> >>>>8. 6Bone Operations Group >>>> >>>>The 6Bone Operations Group is the group in charge of monitoring and >>>>policing adherence to the current rules. Membership in the 6Bone >>>>Operations Group is mandatory for, and restricted to, sites connected >>>>to the 6Bone. >>>> >>>>The 6Bone Operations Group is currently defined by those members of >>>>the existing 6Bone mailing list who represent sites participating in >>>>the 6Bone. Therefore it is incumbent on relevant site contacts to >>>>join the 6Bone mailing list. Instructions on how to join the list >>>>are maintained on the 6Bone web site at < http://www.6bone.net>. >>>> >>>All three persons mentioned above are memmbers of the list 6bone@isi.edu >>>and are prepared to join additional lists if required to fulfill this >>>commitment >>> >>>Sincerely >>> >>>Bjorn Pehrson >>>SSVL admin-c >>> >> > From pekkas@netcore.fi Sat Apr 20 18:10:17 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 20:10:17 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 In-Reply-To: <3CC179D6.6080006@it.kth.se> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bjorn Pehrson wrote: > SSVL is a research network, separate from the regular KTH network and > from Sunet. SSVL is an AS of its own, multi-homed with international, > and even intercontinental, peering. We should not be regarded as a > regular university facility. This does surprise me: it was hard to believe an AS number was used for this. So this is not a regular university facility. Rather, more like a regular university's (or even facility's) independent testbed. With these considerations, a /48 from SUNET might be justified. (By the way, I think we have similar (but larger, not yet widely in IPv6 business) here at FUNET: http://www.otaverkko.com/ -- they have their ASN, IPv4 blocks, but will probably get, in time when they request it, a /48 from us.) > The reason why we apply for p/sTLA status is that we are sponsored with > research grants and a few dedicated physical links to do research on > issues regarding ipv6 network topology, scalability and interdomain > issues which cannot be studied experimentally unless you are active on > the TLA level. Surely you realize that this does not seem to be a valid reason? I believe there are thousands of researchers who would like to do something like that too..? > Neither Sunet nor KTH has a pTLA assignment. Sunet do have an sTLA > assignment but is not yet operating and has not yet responded to our > question about when they will start operating. I believe you should try to pressure KTH (and KTHNOC :-): if a client organization has a need for IPv6, I think SUNET is obliged to assign space. When that is done, quite a lot would be possible, including those bi-lateral peerings. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From bjorn@it.kth.se Sat Apr 20 19:16:13 2002 From: bjorn@it.kth.se (Bjorn Pehrson) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 20:16:13 +0200 Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 References: Message-ID: <3CC1B06D.4010607@it.kth.se> Pekka, Yes, SSVL is an independent research network. I know of other such networks although it is fairly few, not thousands. Since 1996, it is used by several universities and non-academic organizations to do various types of research that are impossible or hard to do in regular networks. Due to the topology of the network, AS8973 was granted us in 1998. Due to the nature of our experiments, we moved from KTH address space to 192.16.124.0/22 in 2000, not to cause problems with aggregation. Since some time, the focus has shifted towards ipv6 interchange and global interdomain issues which require access to the TLA level. I do consider this a valid reason. Sunet do provide addresses, altough they do not yet forward packets, but, as far as I know, they cannot provide a TLA-prefix for us. Best regards Bjorn Pekka Savola wrote: >On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bjorn Pehrson wrote: > >>SSVL is a research network, separate from the regular KTH network and >>from Sunet. SSVL is an AS of its own, multi-homed with international, >>and even intercontinental, peering. We should not be regarded as a >>regular university facility. >> > >This does surprise me: it was hard to believe an AS number was used for >this. So this is not a regular university facility. Rather, more like a >regular university's (or even facility's) independent testbed. > >With these considerations, a /48 from SUNET might be justified. > >(By the way, I think we have similar (but larger, not yet widely in IPv6 >business) here at FUNET: http://www.otaverkko.com/ -- they have their >ASN, IPv4 blocks, but will probably get, in time when they request it, a >/48 from us.) > >>The reason why we apply for p/sTLA status is that we are sponsored with >>research grants and a few dedicated physical links to do research on >>issues regarding ipv6 network topology, scalability and interdomain >>issues which cannot be studied experimentally unless you are active on >>the TLA level. >> > >Surely you realize that this does not seem to be a valid reason? I >believe there are thousands of researchers who would like to do something >like that too..? > >>Neither Sunet nor KTH has a pTLA assignment. Sunet do have an sTLA >>assignment but is not yet operating and has not yet responded to our >>question about when they will start operating. >> > >I believe you should try to pressure KTH (and KTHNOC :-): if a client >organization has a need for IPv6, I think SUNET is obliged to assign >space. When that is done, quite a lot would be possible, including those >bi-lateral peerings. > From pekkas@netcore.fi Sat Apr 20 19:53:31 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 21:53:31 +0300 (EEST) Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 In-Reply-To: <3CC1B06D.4010607@it.kth.se> Message-ID: On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bjorn Pehrson wrote: > Yes, SSVL is an independent research network. I know of other such > networks although it is fairly few, not thousands. Since 1996, it is > used by several universities and non-academic organizations to do > various types of research that are impossible or hard to do in regular > networks. Due to the topology of the network, AS8973 was granted us in > 1998. Due to the nature of our experiments, we moved from KTH address > space to 192.16.124.0/22 in 2000, not to cause problems with aggregation. [...] > Sunet do provide addresses, altough they do not yet forward packets, > but, as far as I know, they cannot provide a TLA-prefix for us. I can feel for you -- life is rather difficult w.r.t. IPv6 connectivity in Swedish Universities, I imagine. Which is partially why you seem to have chosen to go this route. This surely would get IPv6 better in the Swedish community.. but.. is opening this can of worms _in the global scope_ worth the cost.. > Since some time, the focus has shifted towards ipv6 interchange and > global interdomain issues which require access to the TLA level. I do > consider this a valid reason. Usually these kind of more or less global tests are done either: - in co-operation with someone with possibility to do them, in your case SUNET - in a test network Consider: how would you feel about researches applying for ASN and address block so they could experiment, research, etc. BGP behaviour in the global scope? The approach and the tools would seem to be wrong. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From bjorn@it.kth.se Sat Apr 20 21:10:53 2002 From: bjorn@it.kth.se (Bjorn Pehrson) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 22:10:53 +0200 Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 References: Message-ID: <3CC1CB4D.7000602@it.kth.se> Pekka, I would like to stress that we are sponsored by and work with industry and other external organizations, as well as with other universities in a global context. It is not a matter just of ipv6 connectivity at Swedish universities. And there are many other issues than BGP behaviour. We believe that we have the competence and resources to do this research in a responsible way, given the access to the appropriate mechanisms. Bjorn Pekka Savola wrote: >On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Bjorn Pehrson wrote: > >>Yes, SSVL is an independent research network. I know of other such >>networks although it is fairly few, not thousands. Since 1996, it is >>used by several universities and non-academic organizations to do >>various types of research that are impossible or hard to do in regular >>networks. Due to the topology of the network, AS8973 was granted us in >>1998. Due to the nature of our experiments, we moved from KTH address >>space to 192.16.124.0/22 in 2000, not to cause problems with aggregation. >> >[...] > >>Sunet do provide addresses, altough they do not yet forward packets, >>but, as far as I know, they cannot provide a TLA-prefix for us. >> > >I can feel for you -- life is rather difficult w.r.t. IPv6 connectivity in >Swedish Universities, I imagine. Which is partially why you seem to have >chosen to go this route. > >This surely would get IPv6 better in the Swedish community.. but.. is >opening this can of worms _in the global scope_ worth the cost.. > >>Since some time, the focus has shifted towards ipv6 interchange and >>global interdomain issues which require access to the TLA level. I do >>consider this a valid reason. >> > >Usually these kind of more or less global tests are done either: > - in co-operation with someone with possibility to do them, in your case >SUNET > - in a test network > >Consider: how would you feel about researches applying for ASN and address >block so they could experiment, research, etc. BGP behaviour in the >global scope? The approach and the tools would seem to be wrong. > From lucifer@lightbearer.com Sat Apr 20 21:13:16 2002 From: lucifer@lightbearer.com (Joel Baker) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 14:13:16 -0600 Subject: pTLA request SSVL - review closes 3 May 2002 In-Reply-To: <3CC1B06D.4010607@it.kth.se>; from bjorn@it.kth.se on Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 08:16:13PM +0200 References: <3CC1B06D.4010607@it.kth.se> Message-ID: <20020420141316.A29719@lightbearer.com> On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 08:16:13PM +0200, Bjorn Pehrson wrote: > Pekka, > > Yes, SSVL is an independent research network. I know of other such > networks although it is fairly few, not thousands. Since 1996, it is > used by several universities and non-academic organizations to do > various types of research that are impossible or hard to do in regular > networks. Due to the topology of the network, AS8973 was granted us in > 1998. Due to the nature of our experiments, we moved from KTH address > space to 192.16.124.0/22 in 2000, not to cause problems with aggregation. > Since some time, the focus has shifted towards ipv6 interchange and > global interdomain issues which require access to the TLA level. I do > consider this a valid reason. > Sunet do provide addresses, altough they do not yet forward packets, > but, as far as I know, they cannot provide a TLA-prefix for us. And thus, we once again see evidence that the notion of hierarchial routing is never going to fly without an enforced mandate... or everyone with an AS will want a TLA which can be routed arbitrarily. Yes, I know there's a multihoming draft. As it's name implies, it's.. well, a draft. And none of the various multi-address-capable protocols are even remotely close to wide adoption yet. -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ From itojun@iijlab.net Mon Apr 22 04:02:55 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:02:55 +0900 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: pekkas's message of Sat, 20 Apr 2002 15:38:04 +0300. Message-ID: <24592.1019444575@itojun.org> I don't think freebsd-stable is suitable for this thread, so dropped it from cc: list. >I don't agree. There may be differences what one means with 'production' >though. Personally, if I had a power to switch on IPv6 on www.google.com >hosts, I would only do it by adding www.ipv6.google.com: NOT with >www.google.com. People who are afraid of degrading service and it costing >real money are reluctant. it depends on how you run your IPv4/v6 servers. for instance, we are running ftp.iij.ad.jp, one of the most famous anonymous ftp server in Japan, dual-stacked. this is because we think it robust enough. for our company website, www.iij.ad.jp, we do like this: the we are using is like this: - "www.iij.ad.jp" has A record and AAAA record. there actually are two machines. - "A" record for www.iij.ad.jp points to one of them, which runs very stable version of IPv4. the machine has the actual data. - "AAAA" record for www.iij.ad.jp points to another one, which NFS- mounts the data partition from IPv4 one. we do monitor them closely, and they have impressive uptime. if you run www.ipv6.google.com, people won't be able to smoothly migrate to IPv6. i believe it a major drawback. my point is, there are a lot of ways you can operate dual-stack services, and you just need to make a right choice. >An example of potentially technically capable stuff: IPv6 service of >playground.sun.com/ipv6/ was down/out-of-sync some time ago.. and that >isn't even a "production" site. i guess this is because IPv6 variant of playground.sun.com has not been given enough babysitting/monitoring. I don't like it to be seen as an example of lousiness of IPv6. it is lousy operation that causes trouble, not lousy protocol/implementation. (i'm not blaming those who administer playground.sun.com) itojun From pekkas@netcore.fi Mon Apr 22 07:04:34 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 09:04:34 +0300 (EEST) Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <24592.1019444575@itojun.org> Message-ID: On Mon, 22 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: [snip] > if you run www.ipv6.google.com, people won't be able to smoothly > migrate to IPv6. i believe it a major drawback. > > my point is, there are a lot of ways you can operate dual-stack > services, and you just need to make a right choice. I don't dispute this. Telling people who don't have a lot of experience with IPv6, though, to put their services in the same name as AAAA is not often the best solution though. _When_ they're confortable enough with "IPv6 production", the move from xxx.ipv6.yyy.com to (also) xxx.yyy.com is usually not a problem. My point is that it's easy to begin with a separate zone -- there are no (potentially) negative side-effects -- and move to combined zone when you gain experience and feel confortable doing so. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From jeroen@unfix.org Mon Apr 22 10:56:51 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 11:56:51 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <024c01c1e9cf$d8999350$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <008101c1e9e4$07ec8180$534510ac@cyan> Robert wrote: > I'd really like to have the program Shoutcast Server (www.shoutcast.com) > able to run on the 6bone, able to listen to IPv6 addreses, but the authors aren't answering me :-) > I believe that as applications that are mainstream increase in availability, > more people will want to move across, even if it's only initially running dual-stack. You could try ice-cast IPv6... Find it on: http://www.bugfactory.org/~gav/ipv6/ >> it depends on how you run your IPv4/v6 servers. for instance, we are >> running ftp.iij.ad.jp, one of the most famous anonymous ftp server in >> Japan, dual-stacked. this is because we think it robust enough. > That's what it's all about. Robustness. And that takes management. >> >> - "AAAA" record for www.iij.ad.jp points to another one, which NFS- >> mounts the data partition from IPv4 one. > interesting idea... http://www.ipng.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 1.3 http://games.concepts.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 2.0.32 and it's 'abused' for a nice caching trick to allow IPv4-only webservers, like the current available IIS :(, to be accessed over IPv6: ServerAdmin webmaster@example.org ServerName www.example.org ServerAlias www.ipv6.example.org ProxyRequests On ProxyPass / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ ProxyPassReverse / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ In your dns: www.example.org. IN A 172.16.1.1 IN AAAA 3ffe:8114::1 www.ipv4.example.org. IN A 172.16.1.1 www.ipv6.example.org. IN AAAA 3ffe:8114::1 The "trick": IPv4-only browser: - connects to www.example.org over IPv4 IPv6-only (or dualstack but IPv6-try-first-IPv4-as-fallback) browser: - connects to www.example.org over IPv6 the proxy on 3ffe:8114::1 see's "www.example.org" Apache matches that as a vhost. and redirects the query to www.ipv4.example.org (172.16.1.1) which is an IIS or other IPv4-only box. Two warns: - add trailing slash ('/') to the ProxyPass & ProxyPassReverse - either use a hostname with only a v4 alias, thats why I have the www.ipv4.example.org or use a "ProxyRemote * http://proxy.example.org" passing all the requests through a IPv4-only proxy. Otherwise the proxy-apache will try the IPv6 version (the local version) and start looping ;) This allows one to 'experiment' with the whole IPv6/IPv4 stuff without 'hazarding' your IPv4 servers. Also users who _do_ have IPv6 connectivity will have a fallback when the IPv6 server is down. And for log-fetisches, the proxied hosts can be configged to do customlogs per vhost ;) This setup works quite well btw and saves on the hassle of setting up NFS on NT boxes (it can be done ofcourse, but NFS doesn't know much about NTFS acl's, and with this transparent proxy everything is kept transparent, it's all in the name ;) Greets, Jeroen From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 22 11:54:56 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:54:56 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <000701c1e7b3$4007cda0$420d640a@unfix.org> References: <5288.1019217600@itojun.org> <000701c1e7b3$4007cda0$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <20020422105456.GK7029@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Hi, I agree with Pekka mostly. Having the same IN A/AAAA RRs for the hostnames in your zonefile can make for awkward situations. One example might be the NL-BIT6 deployment. We have a C3640 with a 10 mbps port acting as vlan router for IPv6. It then pushes the traffic to the AMS-IX. If I am sitting at any IPv6 peer-site, and ssh/ftp/telnet to my machine at the colo, and it were to have both protocols reachable via the same name, then I would connect using IPv6 because this is preferred. However, I like my pron to transfer fast, so the gigabit IPv4 connection (yes I have a 1000SX board in my colo-box :) is preferrable over the turtle-speed IPv6 connection. The other point one might make is that IPv6 is often less well maintained than the IPv4 network. Some tunnel might go down, zebra might crash (or even IOS) and the connection will be left unattended by many administrators. This is why I normally make some distinction either by hostname 'hog.colo.bit.nl IN A' vs 'hog.colo.ipv6.bit.nl IN AAAA' or by domain name 'hog.colo.bit.nl IN A' vs 'hog.ipng.nl IN AAAA'. groet, Pim On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 05:02:34PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: | itojun@iijlab.net wrote: | | > >In the forward/reverse zones on a 6to4 setup, should I have | > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 | > >nanguo-v6 IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 | > >or | > >nanguo IN A 203.1.96.5 | > >nanguo IN AAAA 2002:cb01:6005:2::1 | > >When referring to the particular host ? | > >Either works - but which is ... errr... correct? | > | > i recommend the latter, definitely. with the latter | > you will be able o transition to IPv6 much smoother. | | Definitely the latter one even with reverses. | I do usually add something like: | | purgatory A 195.64.92.136 | purgatory AAAA 3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f | purgatory.ipv4 A 195.64.92.136 | purgatory.ipv6 AAAA 3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f | | Reason: some programs can't be told to only use IPv6 or only IPv4 | (usually -6 or -4 option). | This way one can 'force' it to use either transport. | I do usually leave out the ipv4 though as I don't use that much any more | anyways ;) | | Greets, | Jeroen -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 22 12:00:05 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:00:05 +0200 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) In-Reply-To: <20020420141316.A29719@lightbearer.com> References: <3CC1B06D.4010607@it.kth.se> <20020420141316.A29719@lightbearer.com> Message-ID: <20020422110005.GL7029@bfib.colo.bit.nl> | | And thus, we once again see evidence that the notion of hierarchial routing | is never going to fly without an enforced mandate... or everyone with an AS | will want a TLA which can be routed arbitrarily. If everyone with an AS will have a TLA then I would be very happy. That would mean 64K prefixes in the DFZ ;-) | Yes, I know there's a multihoming draft. As it's name implies, it's.. well, | a draft. And none of the various multi-address-capable protocols are even | remotely close to wide adoption yet. Afaik, there has never been an answer to multihoming except perhaps 'create a higher accepted prefixlen', but that only moves the problem downwards. >From a technical point of view, there is no need for multihoming. An ISP (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain redundant uplinks to the Internet, multiple peering routers, multiple transit carriers, etcetc, without the need for the customer to have its prefix announced by more than one ISP. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 22 12:01:58 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:01:58 +0200 Subject: IPv6 Address Oracle & In-Reply-To: References: <10532.1019268953@itojun.org> Message-ID: <20020422110158.GM7029@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 05:08:32PM -1000, Antonio Querubin wrote: | On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: | | > are there an html + png (or gif or whatever), or pdf version of the | > slides? i don't have any powerpoint around here... Itojun, The talk from Deering was very nice and well prepared, however not extremely die-hard as most of us will have seen the contents of his presentation already. For anyone really interrested, I will create a PDF later on today and post it somewhere on the web for your enjoyment. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From lutchann-6bone@litech.org Mon Apr 22 13:27:55 2002 From: lutchann-6bone@litech.org (Nathan Lutchansky) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:27:55 -0400 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal>; from rain@bluecherry.net on Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 02:22:12AM -0500 References: <001901c1e105$b3754e20$420d640a@unfix.org> <1018509733.20458.7.camel@portal> Message-ID: <20020422082755.C22982@litech.org> --4ZLFUWh1odzi/v6L Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 02:22:12AM -0500, Ben Winslow wrote: > Jeroen's post sparked interest in knowing what people are currently > using with IPv6 support on a regular basis. It's much easier to immerse yourself in IPv6 when you're not using Windows. IPv6-accessible services running on my Linux workstations and servers are HTTP, NNTP, DNS, FTP, SSH, IDENT, Telnet, SMB, LDAP, CVS, IMAP, SMTP, POP3, and Kerberos. Even user information is distributed from the central server using LDAP, and clients use Kerberos for authentication, all over IPv6. The remarkable part is that, with the exception of Samba, all of these daemons are available with IPv6 support either with RedHat 7.2 or directly from the application author. Samba is= =20 the only package that needed a third-party patch. Hopefully that will be= =20 resolved in Samba 3.0. The only services I use that don't have IPv6 support are CUPS, X, and VNC. = =20 IPv6 VNC would be really nice on the Windows side, but considering that Windows support for everything is so unbelievably weak right now I'm not surprised. I can't hardly make myself more IPv6-y without Microsoft's=20 help. :-/ > Mail is one place I'd like to see IPv6 support improve for. Do any MTAs > besides Exim support IPv6? What MUAs support IPv6? Sendmail has IPv6 support. RedHat has been shipping an IPv6-enabled=20 Sendmail since 7.0. Courier's SMTP server, as well as the rest of the=20 Courier package, supports IPv6. I believe qmail and Postfix require=20 patches, but I'm not so familiar with those packages. > ssh, HTTP, and nfs make up the majority of my traffic, so I'm more or > less content. It would be nice to have an IPv6-enabled NFS client/server for Linux, but= =20 I don't care that much since I don't use NFS personally. -Nathan --=20 +-------------------+---------------------+------------------------+ | Nathan Lutchansky | lutchann@litech.org | Lithium Technologies | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | I dread success. To have succeeded is to have finished one's | | business on earth... I like a state of continual becoming, | | with a goal in front and not behind. - George Bernard Shaw | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ --4ZLFUWh1odzi/v6L Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8xAHLTviDkW8mhycRAlUXAJ97DImOmSnhxps33ay77/3Pa6jr3ACfZrum hKcNNZTqqy0wf+dNYajbX/0= =r4DA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4ZLFUWh1odzi/v6L-- From benchoff@vt.edu Mon Apr 22 13:35:21 2002 From: benchoff@vt.edu (Phil Benchoff) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:35:21 -0400 Subject: [6BONE] A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <008101c1e9e4$07ec8180$534510ac@cyan>; from jeroen@unfix.org on Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 11:56:51AM +0200 References: <024c01c1e9cf$d8999350$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> <008101c1e9e4$07ec8180$534510ac@cyan> Message-ID: <20020422083521.C18779@groupw.cns.vt.edu> Since people are posting about how they are handling DNS issues, I thought I would explain what I do as well. .example.edu normal v4 records .ip6.example.edu AAAA records hosted on our production bind-8 .ip6a6.example.edu A6 records hosted on test bind-9 .ipv6.example.edu A,A6,allow-v6-synthesis test bind-9 * The only zone data I enter is the ip6a6 data. The rest are generated from that file. * The ipv6.example.edu zone is the simulation of what will happen when we move the v6 stuff into the production zone. The only issue to deal with is servers that do not support v6 on all of their services. * The ip6 and ip6a6 zones are primarily used for testing exactly how applications react when there is a specific type of RR returned. So far, this appears to work pretty well. Phil From benchoff@vt.edu Mon Apr 22 14:11:53 2002 From: benchoff@vt.edu (Phil Benchoff) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 09:11:53 -0400 Subject: Apache 2.0 Reverse Proxy for v6 access to v4 servers Message-ID: <20020422091153.E18779@groupw.cns.vt.edu> Old subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records Jeroen Massar wrote: > http://www.ipng.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 1.3 > http://games.concepts.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 2.0.32 and it's > 'abused' for a nice caching trick to allow IPv4-only webservers, like > the current available IIS :(, to be accessed over IPv6: > > > ServerAdmin webmaster@example.org > ServerName www.example.org > ServerAlias www.ipv6.example.org > ProxyRequests On > ProxyPass / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ > ProxyPassReverse / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ > I have been playing with this same thing through various betas of Apache 2.0 and the released 2.0.35. The cool thing about this is that authentication is passed through the reverse proxy, i.e. password-protected pages are still password protected. You have to be careful about things protected by IP address or domain name since the v-4 server sees the access from the reverse proxy. (Note: I do not have "Proxy Requests On" in my config.) Since I started playing with this, I have had problems with partial data being returned. It has improved with the various releases, but I still see it in 2.0.35. A typical example looks like this: [Mon Apr 22 08:53:10 2002] [error] [client ] proxy: Error reading from remote server returned by /img/misc/vt-logo.gif, referer: http://.ip6.vt.edu/public/toc.html It appears that the Apache 2.0 server tries to fetch htdocs/error/HTTP_BAD_GATEWAY.html.var after this happens. I haven't looked at it enough to figure out exactly what is going on yet. I've only tested under Linux, and may try a FreeBSD or Tru64 version to see if that makes a difference. Anybody else see this problem? Phil From jeroen@unfix.org Mon Apr 22 15:18:19 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:18:19 +0200 Subject: A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <20020422105456.GK7029@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: <003d01c1ea08$8e66e330$534510ac@cyan> Pim van Pelt [mailto:pim@ipng.nl] wrote: > Hi, > > I agree with Pekka mostly. Having the same IN A/AAAA RRs for the > hostnames in your zonefile can make for awkward situations. > One example might be the NL-BIT6 deployment. We have a C3640 with a > 10 mbps port acting as vlan router for IPv6. It then pushes the traffic > to the AMS-IX. If I am sitting at any IPv6 peer-site, and > ssh/ftp/telnet to my machine at the colo, and it were to have both > protocols reachable via the same name, then I would connect using IPv6 > because this is preferred. ssh -4 purgatory.unfix.org or the 'ssh purgatory.ipv4.unfix.org' trick but I don't have that one in the outside dns apparently ;) > However, I like my pron to transfer fast, so the gigabit IPv4 connection > (yes I have a 1000SX board in my colo-box :) is preferrable over the > turtle-speed IPv6 connection. IMHO you should upgrade that IPv6 connect. Fortunatly 10mbit is still 2mbit more than my inet-uplink is capable of And: --- purgatory.unfix.org ping statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% loss, time 4035ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 19.342/21.498/24.997/2.005 ms vs: --- purgatory.unfix.org ping6 statistics --- 5 packets transmitted, 5 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 19.9/21.9/27.3 ms Doesn't differ much for me, latency wise. Besides that I don't have that heavy pr0n traffic desirement ;) Btw.. did you see that nice 10/100/1000mbit port on those cute Powerbook G4's ? And they can do IPv6, now I'll only have to find some financial aid and that gbit uplink > The other point one might make is that IPv6 is often less well > maintained than the IPv4 network. Some tunnel might go down, zebra might > crash (or even IOS) and the connection will be left unattended by many > administrators. This is why I normally make some distinction either by > hostname 'hog.colo.bit.nl IN A' vs 'hog.colo.ipv6.bit.nl IN AAAA' or by > domain name 'hog.colo.bit.nl IN A' vs 'hog.ipng.nl IN AAAA'. Absolutely, but I personally know who to kick when you bring down my IPv6 uplink Also IPng.nl fortunatly has only been down due to scheduled maintainances and not because it 'failed' suddenly. And you probably also remember how the couple of times we saved a box because the IPv4 routing was peeped and we still could reach it over IPv6; Long live native IPv6. This whole story ofcourse all depends on the fact how far one is in the transition process and if you take IPv6 for granted as a 'must-work' service level just like IPv4. Personal taste also comes in mind ofcourse ;) Greets, Jeroen From michael@kjorling.com Mon Apr 22 15:47:22 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 16:47:22 +0200 (CDT) Subject: [6BONE] A DNS question re 6to6/IPv6 host IN A records. In-Reply-To: <20020422083521.C18779@groupw.cns.vt.edu> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 22 2002 08:35 -0400, Phil Benchoff wrote: > Since people are posting about how they are handling DNS issues, I thought > I would explain what I do as well. > > .example.edu normal v4 records > .ip6.example.edu AAAA records hosted on our production bind-8 > .ip6a6.example.edu A6 records hosted on test bind-9 > .ipv6.example.edu A,A6,allow-v6-synthesis test bind-9 > > * The only zone data I enter is the ip6a6 data. The rest are generated > from that file. > > * The ipv6.example.edu zone is the simulation of what will happen when > we move the v6 stuff into the production zone. The only issue to > deal with is servers that do not support v6 on all of their services. > > * The ip6 and ip6a6 zones are primarily used for testing exactly how > applications react when there is a specific type of RR returned. > > So far, this appears to work pretty well. > > Phil Servers not supporting IPv6 on all services is the biggest obstacle for me. I need to upgrade to a more recent glibc in order to get support for UDP over IPv6 with the Linux 2.4 kernel tree, but upgrading the C library isn't something you do in a coffee break. Other than that, all services on one of my boxes are IPv6-enabled. As it is now, I have put in A and AAAA records at the same node in the DNS, and added IPv4-only and IPv6-only nodes below it. So: whatever.example.org. A 127.0.0.1 AAAA ::1 ipv4.whatever.example.org. A 127.0.0.1 ipv6.whatever.example.org. AAAA ::1 This way, people who have IPv6-capable clients will get whatever they are looking for (except DNS, unfortunately - see above on UDP/v6) over IPv6, and people whose clients are not IPv6-capable will use IPv4 just fine. If I for some reason want to force either IPv4 or IPv6, I can do that without any trouble. I have also set up a few "www6" CNAMEs (and sometimes even AAAAs) pointing at the IPv6 address records only. Might come in handy some day and DNS records hardly cost anything... By the way, remember that allow-v6-synthesisis requires that you allow the querying client recursion. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8xCJ8KqN7/Ypw4z4RAv80AKDDYKVXxnFj+jM3bFu+tBIfkwU8QwCgu5q8 amZDCKm0QaI6brjkFfgMSSs= =S+BM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Mon Apr 22 16:40:17 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 08:40:17 -0700 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFAD@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> > Pim van Pelt wrote: > If everyone with an AS will have a TLA then I would be very happy. > That would mean 64K prefixes in the DFZ ;-) That is, before we get 32-bit AS numbers. > From a technical point of view, there is no need for multihoming. > An ISP (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain > redundant uplinks to the Internet, multiple peering routers, > multiple transit carriers, etcetc, without the need for the > customer to have its prefix announced by more than one ISP. This does not address: 1. The desire of the customer not to be held hostage by the ISP. 2. The performance requirement that some customers need to have direct transit from a large number of tier-1. Michel. From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Mon Apr 22 18:14:34 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 19:14:34 +0200 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <20020422082755.C22982@litech.org> Message-ID: <009801c1ea21$2c4e16a0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On > Behalf Of Nathan Lutchansky > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 2:28 PM > To: 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: Re: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use > > The only services I use that don't have IPv6 support are > CUPS, X, and VNC. > IPv6 VNC would be really nice on the Windows side, but > considering that > Windows support for everything is so unbelievably weak right > now I'm not > surprised. I can't hardly make myself more IPv6-y without > Microsoft's > help. :-/ > X and VNC have IPv6 support: VNC 3.3.2r3: ftp://ftp.kame.net/pub/kame/misc/ XFree 3.3.3.1: http://cvsweb.pld.org.pl/ I think CUPS too but i don't find the patch. You can find a lot of informations about ipv6 support on (thank Peter for this excellent page, don't forgot to update it): http://bieringer.mirrors.fastnetxp.com/status/IPv6+Linux-status-apps.htm l If many people want help me to build a FTP with all ipv6 patchs, ipv6 apps patched, ipv6 docs, and more; please contact me. You can send me all yours links, yours patchs, and yours recompiled packages for debian, redhat, freebsd,..... I plain to finish a first public version of the FTP at the end of this week (for the moment the ftp use 200mb of disk space) Best Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET From jeroen@unfix.org Mon Apr 22 19:00:17 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:00:17 +0200 Subject: Apache 2.0 Reverse Proxy for v6 access to v4 servers In-Reply-To: <20020422091153.E18779@groupw.cns.vt.edu> Message-ID: <003901c1ea27$90195d10$420d640a@unfix.org> Phil Benchoff wrote: > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > http://www.ipng.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 1.3 > > http://games.concepts.nl runs IPv6 & IPv4 in one Apache 2.0.32 and it's > > 'abused' for a nice caching trick to allow IPv4-only webservers, like > > the current available IIS :(, to be accessed over IPv6: > > > > > > ServerAdmin webmaster@example.org > > ServerName www.example.org > > ServerAlias www.ipv6.example.org > > ProxyRequests On > > ProxyPass / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ > > ProxyPassReverse / http://www.ipv4.example.org/ > > > > > I have been playing with this same thing through various betas of Apache 2.0 > and the released 2.0.35. The cool thing about this is that authentication > is passed through the reverse proxy, i.e. password-protected pages are > still password protected. You have to be careful about things protected > by IP address or domain name since the v-4 server sees the access from > the reverse proxy. (Note: I do not have "Proxy Requests On" > in my config.) One will always see the request coming from the proxy's address ofcourse ;) You could forge that in some weird ways but that would require setting up stuff on the remote side and that's exactly what I didn't want to do in this case. > Since I started playing with this, I have had problems with partial data > being returned. It has improved with the various releases, but I still > see it in 2.0.35. A typical example looks like this: > > [Mon Apr 22 08:53:10 2002] [error] [client ] > proxy: Error reading from remote server returned by > /img/misc/vt-logo.gif, referer: http://.ip6.vt.edu/public/toc.html > > It appears that the Apache 2.0 server tries to fetch > htdocs/error/HTTP_BAD_GATEWAY.html.var after this happens. I haven't looked > at it enough to figure out exactly what is going on yet. I've only tested > under Linux, and may try a FreeBSD or Tru64 version to see if that makes > a difference. > > Anybody else see this problem? Yeps..... but it went away when I started using the local IPv4 proxy cache ;) Simply add "ProxyRemote * proxy.example.org". Which was the easier way out as I didn't want to add www.ipv4. to every proxied host. This usually also fixes the bypassing of the IP's as the local proxy is known to be non-trusted anyways. Untill one decaffed admin comes along ofcourse. The box (http://games.concepts.nl) has an Archive of all kinds of game-patches which go up to 150mb per file sometimes, and they all get served up cleanly. To make it a bit more related, Quakeworld and Quake2 IPv6 are mirrored and running there too ;) Greets, Jeroen From lucifer@lightbearer.com Mon Apr 22 19:05:03 2002 From: lucifer@lightbearer.com (Joel Baker) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 12:05:03 -0600 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFAD@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>; from michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us on Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 08:40:17AM -0700 References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFAD@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <20020422120503.A2151@lightbearer.com> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 08:40:17AM -0700, Michel Py wrote: > > Pim van Pelt wrote: > > If everyone with an AS will have a TLA then I would be very happy. > > That would mean 64K prefixes in the DFZ ;-) > > That is, before we get 32-bit AS numbers. > > > From a technical point of view, there is no need for multihoming. > > An ISP (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain > > redundant uplinks to the Internet, multiple peering routers, > > multiple transit carriers, etcetc, without the need for the > > customer to have its prefix announced by more than one ISP. > > This does not address: > 1. The desire of the customer not to be held hostage by the ISP. > 2. The performance requirement that some customers need to have direct > transit from a large number of tier-1. 3. The number of large ISPs now filing Chapter 11 and turning off their networks. For mid-size players, #3 is far more crucial than #2, and is really just a subset of the causes for #1. Those mid-size players form a significant chunk of the folks holding ASNs (since the big players aren't numerous, and the small players have a hard time getting ASNs). True, 1 ASN -> 1 pTLA works, for now. But, as pointed out above... those 64k numbers are, what, nearly half gone already? Somehow, making the IPv6 situation *worse*, by ensuring we run out faster than IPv4 addresses, does not seem to be a winning proposition to me... (Okay, to restrain the hyperbole, it might not be worse, but it certainly doesn't seem to be a whole lot better, either). -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ From nileshks78@yahoo.com Mon Apr 22 19:08:51 2002 From: nileshks78@yahoo.com (nileshks78) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 11:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: hello Message-ID: <20020422180851.81660.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> Hello all, I am very much interested into ipv6 and newbie to it, I am using dual-stack under linux. I have got global ipv6 address 3ffe:0b80:2:7db5::2/128. what this address mean to my network, is it network addr or host addr. I want to leant more about ipv6, can anyone tell me what should i do now. I have tried ping6, traceroute6. Thanks for helping Nilesh pes.edu ===== Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX. Love Linux forever........ Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. (Dennis Ritchie) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more http://games.yahoo.com/ From pim@ipng.nl Mon Apr 22 19:22:35 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 20:22:35 +0200 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFAD@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> References: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFAD@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <20020422182235.GB22812@bfib.colo.bit.nl> | That is, before we get 32-bit AS numbers. Interresting point, are there any concrete plans for this ? | > From a technical point of view, there is no need for multihoming. | > An ISP (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain | > redundant uplinks to the Internet, multiple peering routers, | > multiple transit carriers, etcetc, without the need for the | > customer to have its prefix announced by more than one ISP. | | This does not address: | 1. The desire of the customer not to be held hostage by the ISP. | 2. The performance requirement that some customers need to have direct | transit from a large number of tier-1. Both are not technical, but administrative. Especially the first one. I do not say that these issues are non-existant, I'm merely pointing out that these have nothing to do with the protocol, but with the way one organises his/her network topology. (eg, multihoming itself can be done easily with IPv6 also, but aggregation rules forbid it, as could they forbid things in the IPv4 world) groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From ck@arch.bellsouth.net Mon Apr 22 19:52:24 2002 From: ck@arch.bellsouth.net (Christian Kuhtz) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:52:24 -0400 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) In-Reply-To: <20020422110005.GL7029@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: > From a technical point of view, there is no need for > multihoming. An ISP > (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain > redundant uplinks > to the Internet, multiple peering routers, multiple transit > carriers, > etcetc, without the need for the customer to have its > prefix announced > by more than one ISP. pim, et al, if i may interject here.. with all due respect, i find such notions very much out of touch with reality. there is very much a need for multi-homing, from a service provider as well as end customer point of view. the non-existent support for such a vital topology feature is probably one of the biggest, most glaring holes in the current fabric of policy and technology that we have. the 'these are not the droids you're looking for' speech doesn't work to declare multi-homing obsolete, nor is there any recognizable motion in the ietf or any other standards body or association that i'm aware of to provide us with such functionality or functionality which serves the same purpose. the non-existance of multi-homing is an issue. any customer should have the ability to create multi-homing for redundancy, load-balancing, whatever as they see fit as there are well known and well documented uses for it. one service provider is very much a single point of failure and unacceptable for those wishing to avoid such dependency. for us to stand there and declare to the customer 'dear customer, you need not to worry about redundancy or dependency on us' will not work, will not allow us to pass the straight face test, and will get us laughed out the door with all but those customers who couldn't find a packet with both hands ever. now, i'm not saying we should approve pTLAs for anyone interested in multi-homing, but we do have a gaping hole here where there's no real solution apparent and where standards bodies are of little help at present. and to say 'there's no reason or no need' is simply false from where i stand. thanks, chris From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Mon Apr 22 21:41:51 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 13:41:51 -0700 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFB5@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> >>> Pim van Pelt wrote: >>> From a technical point of view, there is no need for multihoming. >>> An ISP (look at the thread I started previously) can maintain >>> redundant uplinks to the Internet, multiple peering routers, >>> multiple transit carriers, etcetc, without the need for the >>> customer to have its prefix announced by more than one ISP. >> Michel Py wrote: >> This does not address: >> 1. The desire of the customer not to be held hostage by the ISP. >> 2. The performance requirement that some customers need to have direct >> transit from a large number of tier-1. > Pim van Pelt wrote: > Both are not technical, but administrative. Especially the first one. I would call the first one political, but the second one is technical, a matter of getting directly hooked to the major backbone your customer is hooked to as well. > Joel Baker wrote: > 3. The number of large ISPs now filing Chapter 11 and turning off > their networks. > For mid-size players, #3 is far more crucial than #2, and is really > just a subset of the causes for #1. I agree. > Pim van Pelt wrote: > (eg, multihoming itself can be done easily with IPv6 also, but > aggregation rules forbid it, as could they forbid things in the > IPv4 world) You are twisting words. What you are saying is that v6 multihoming could be possible if we changed the rules and that v4 multihoming could be impossible if we changed the rules. The situation today is that multihoming can be done and is being done in v4, and does not exist in v6. There is no way the v4 rules could change at this point. Michel. From michael@kjorling.com Mon Apr 22 21:59:15 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 22:59:15 +0200 (CDT) Subject: hello In-Reply-To: <20020422180851.81660.qmail@web13907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 22 2002 11:08 -0700, nileshks78 wrote: > Hello all, > > I am very much interested into ipv6 and newbie to it, > I am using dual-stack under linux. > > I have got global ipv6 address > 3ffe:0b80:2:7db5::2/128. > what this address mean to my network, is it network > addr or host addr. I want to leant more about ipv6, > can anyone tell me what should i do now. I have tried > ping6, traceroute6. > > Thanks for helping > Nilesh > pes.edu Welcome into the brave world of IPv6. :-) To answer your question: the address you showed (3ffe:b80:2:7db5::2/128 - yes you can strip any leading zeroes after a colon, but not trailing zeroes) is a host address. In general, a network will have either a /64 or a /48, depending on the needs of the site. A /128 always means a host address - all 128 bits of the IPv6 address have been specified. It's like a phone number - from the area code you can tell the general area, the prefix gets you closer, but in order to tell which phone you are reaching, you need all of the number. Most likely your network is 3ffe:b80:2:7db5::/64. I tried pinging and tracerouting to you over IPn6 and it does appear that you have general connectivity working (as one would have expected). The next logical step is to obtain software that actually makes use of IPv6 as a transport. One that does is sendmail - another is Apache 2.0. I believe Konqueror and Mozilla (if compiled correctly) makes use of IPv6 when available. Another one that does is fetchmail. The list goes on and on. Since we have no idea how this system is being used, it gets rather hard to guess what software you should get... Hope this helps a little. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8xHmmKqN7/Ypw4z4RAtGuAJ4hQZyI6JbwbK5uZfav1SRixceOygCg5pSc 07fuDMEnF08/J45iwzs+Z58= =wup4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Mon Apr 22 22:07:12 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:07:12 -0700 Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C5C5@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Chris just said exactly what I think except that he said it better than I could myself. Michel. > Christian Kuhtz wrote: > pim, et al, > > if i may interject here.. with all due respect, i find such notions > very much out of touch with reality. > > there is very much a need for multi-homing, from a service provider as > well as end customer point of view. > [snip] > now, i'm not saying we should approve pTLAs for anyone interested in > multi-homing, but we do have a gaping hole here where there's no real > solution apparent and where standards bodies are of little help at > present. and to say 'there's no reason or no need' is simply false > from where i stand. > thanks, > chris From paul@clubi.ie Mon Apr 22 23:28:58 2002 From: paul@clubi.ie (Paul Jakma) Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 23:28:58 +0100 (IST) Subject: TLA request 'for multihoming' (was: pTLA request SSVL) In-Reply-To: <20020422182235.GB22812@bfib.colo.bit.nl> Message-ID: On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Pim van Pelt wrote: > | 1. The desire of the customer not to be held hostage by the ISP. > | 2. The performance requirement that some customers need to have direct > | transit from a large number of tier-1. > Both are not technical, but administrative. Especially the first one. but pinned on a technical issue. if prefixes in DFZ were free, 1,2 above would not be a concern at all. > I do not say that these issues are non-existant, I'm merely > pointing out that these have nothing to do with the protocol, but they do though. changing is difficult because of the technicalities of addressing and routing. with my phone service, i can change who provides my PRI without having to change my number. > with the way one organises his/her network topology. (eg, > multihoming itself can be done easily with IPv6 also, but > aggregation rules forbid it, as could they forbid things in the > IPv4 world) if i am forbidden from having a DFZ routable prefix, the technical issue is left: "how can i have portability between ISPs"? either there's a technical solution or there isnt. the administrative question "may foo have a dedicated DFZ routable prefix?" is a seperate issue. (though with technical implications. :) ) > groet, > Pim regards, -- Paul Jakma paul@clubi.ie paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: A committee takes root and grows, it flowers, wilts and dies, scattering the seed from which other committees will bloom. -- Parkinson From jeroen@unfix.org Tue Apr 23 00:38:40 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 01:38:40 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? Message-ID: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> As I was about to create a nice 'ping-over-the-6bone' tool for ourselfs (IPng.nl) I first tested how many of the hosts actually where alive. With 'hosts' I mean the 'application: ping' lines found in the nightly 6bone.db. I conducted the test at around 01:22 CET the 13the of April from ping.ipng.nl (IPv6) and came up with the following results: jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat 6bone.db | grep application | grep ping | wc -l 791 Which (should) mean there are 779 hosts defined in application ping lines. I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 which skips hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) pinging using 5 icmpv6 packets, which produced the following results jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l 329 jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "unreachable" | wc -l 205 jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "alive" | wc -l 257 Of these 'unreachables' where: jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep unreachable | grep -e "^5f" | wc -l 26 are of the historical 5fxx:: prefix, I will excuse those. This still means, assuming all peering was up at the moment, which as far as I can tell was the case, that about 175+ hosts weren't reachable for one way or the other and those 329 that didn't resolve ouch. I still hope it's a glitch, but a next test today revealed almost the same results. And that's only the "application ping" part, now for a more interresting take, at least I wanted to nag about the fact that the ipv6-site SURFNET (real) == KRAAKPAND (false) in the database, but that apparently has been resolved already ;) I also noticed that not all object/subnetdelegations are noted in the database nor refered to other whois servers. With these current stats I will prolly make a wellknown-hosts pinger as pinging every random site available is a bit overkill anyways. Greets, Jeroen From rblechinger@noc.eurocyber.net Tue Apr 23 08:24:13 2002 From: rblechinger@noc.eurocyber.net (Blechinger Robert) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 09:24:13 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? References: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> Jeroen Massar wrote: > > As I was about to create a nice 'ping-over-the-6bone' tool for ourselfs > (IPng.nl) I first tested how many of the hosts actually where alive. > With 'hosts' I mean the 'application: ping' lines found in the nightly > 6bone.db. > > I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 which skips > hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) i have to aggree, there where many "application" lines with no AAAA record. i think some people doesn't know how to use this application entries. > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l > 329 791 ping entries, 329 of them have no AAAA records.. that's are 41,6 percent!! in my view, this is a little bit to high ;) maybe there should some checks when sending the template to the 6bone.db ? Regards Robert -- Blechinger Robert Cybernet AG - Networking email: rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net Phone: +49 89 99315 - 116 Fax: +49 89 99315 - 199 From wizard@italiansky.com Tue Apr 23 10:39:34 2002 From: wizard@italiansky.com (Matteo Tescione) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 11:39:34 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? References: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <004401c1eaaa$c77aac90$8cf51150@local.comv6.com> The same results here, tried to ping the entire 6bone database "application ping" but get only around 10%, 20% of hosts... The question is: does anybody think to clean up the 6bone database? Thanks a lot Matteo Tescione Ipv6 Dept. COMV6 - Italy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeroen Massar" To: "'6bone'" <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 1:38 AM Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? > As I was about to create a nice 'ping-over-the-6bone' tool for ourselfs > (IPng.nl) I first tested how many of the hosts actually where alive. > With 'hosts' I mean the 'application: ping' lines found in the nightly > 6bone.db. > > I conducted the test at around 01:22 CET the 13the of April from > ping.ipng.nl (IPv6) and came up with the following results: > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat 6bone.db | grep application | grep ping | wc > -l > 791 > > Which (should) mean there are 779 hosts defined in application ping > lines. > I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 which skips > hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) > pinging using 5 icmpv6 packets, which produced the following results > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l > 329 > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "unreachable" | wc -l > 205 > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "alive" | wc -l > 257 > > Of these 'unreachables' where: > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep unreachable | grep -e "^5f" > | wc -l > 26 > are of the historical 5fxx:: prefix, I will excuse those. > This still means, assuming all peering was up at the moment, which as > far as I can tell was the case, > that about 175+ hosts weren't reachable for one way or the other and > those 329 that didn't resolve ouch. > I still hope it's a glitch, but a next test today revealed almost the > same results. > > And that's only the "application ping" part, now for a more interresting > take, at least I wanted to nag about the fact that > the ipv6-site SURFNET (real) == KRAAKPAND (false) in the database, but > that apparently has been resolved already ;) > > I also noticed that not all object/subnetdelegations are noted in the > database nor refered to other whois servers. > > With these current stats I will prolly make a wellknown-hosts pinger as > pinging every random site available is a bit overkill anyways. > > Greets, > Jeroen > From jeroen@unfix.org Tue Apr 23 12:41:11 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 13:41:11 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> Message-ID: <000701c1eabb$c477e420$420d640a@unfix.org> Blechinger Robert [mailto:rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net] wrote: > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > As I was about to create a nice 'ping-over-the-6bone' tool for ourselfs > > (IPng.nl) I first tested how many of the hosts actually where alive. > > With 'hosts' I mean the 'application: ping' lines found in the nightly > > 6bone.db. > > > > I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 which skips > > hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) > > i have to aggree, there where many "application" lines with no AAAA > record. i think some people doesn't know how to use this application > entries. that's not what I meant, no addinfo means that a hostname's IPv6 address is not available in the DNS. eg: "application: ping 3ffe:8114::1" or "application ping ping.ipng.nl" Will both be 'correct' and work. But if I put a: "application: ping ping.example.org" it won't resolve, which is what the "no addrinfo" simply points out; that there completely is no knowledge about a hostname. Thus one can conclude that those hosts simply aren't maintained -> and thus that those 6bone entries aren't maintained either. > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l > > 329 > > 791 ping entries, 329 of them have no AAAA records.. that's are 41,6 percent!! > in my view, this is a little bit to high ;) > > maybe there should some checks when sending the template to > the 6bone.db No there should be a cleanup every month, and if a entry seems invalid, the tech-c etc should be contacted, after 4 months of no reply they should be sacked. Ofcourse one could argue that historic items should be conserved. Then again we could also keep an archive of 6bone.db.gz's per month, before they are cleansed. Greets, Jeroen From helios@balios.org Tue Apr 23 13:11:01 2002 From: helios@balios.org (Helios de Creisquer) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:11:01 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> References: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> Message-ID: <20020423121101.GN21209@balios.org> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 09:24:13AM +0200, Blechinger Robert wrote: > Jeroen Massar wrote: > i have to aggree, there where many "application" lines with no AAAA > record. i think some people doesn't know how to use this application > entries. Yep, it's my case, I dont remind seeing anything about that... I have some hosts alive in 6bone space, but no DNS pointing to them, and no application: line ;-) I should have a public DNS working soon... but for the application: lines, where can I add these ? Cheers, -- Helios de Creisquer http://www.tuxfamily.org/ http://www.vhffs.org/ +33 (0)6 70 71 20 29 http://www.gnu.org/ GPG(1024D/96EB1C44): FB11 8B80 4D86 D9C2 DE0C 11D7 2FA8 A5CC 96EB 1C44 From micklesc@aol.net Tue Apr 23 15:00:07 2002 From: micklesc@aol.net (Cleve Mickles) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 10:00:07 -0400 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> Message-ID: There are also a number of cases where companies have received 6BONE allocations and have since gone out of business. Their PTLA allocations may have been recovered by Bob but the registry entries remain in the database. Is it possible to get these removed as well? When folks see my pinger page it looks like the 6Bone is having a terrible day in terms of reachability. Cleve... Cleve Mickles Network Architect America Online, Network Operations > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU]On Behalf Of > Blechinger Robert > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 3:24 AM > To: Jeroen Massar > Cc: '6bone' > Subject: Re: 6bone Database cleansing? > > > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > As I was about to create a nice 'ping-over-the-6bone' tool for ourselfs > > (IPng.nl) I first tested how many of the hosts actually where alive. > > With 'hosts' I mean the 'application: ping' lines found in the nightly > > 6bone.db. > > > > I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 which skips > > hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) > > i have to aggree, there where many "application" lines with no AAAA > record. i think some people doesn't know how to use this application > entries. > > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l > > 329 > > 791 ping entries, 329 of them have no AAAA records.. that's are 41,6 > percent!! > in my view, this is a little bit to high ;) > > maybe there should some checks when sending the template to the 6bone.db > ? > > Regards Robert > > > > > -- > Blechinger Robert > Cybernet AG - Networking > email: rblechinger@cybernet-ag.net > Phone: +49 89 99315 - 116 > Fax: +49 89 99315 - 199 > From fink@es.net Tue Apr 23 15:53:24 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 07:53:24 -0700 Subject: 6bone pTLA 3FFE:4003::/32 allocated to RMNET Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020423075027.028f54d8@imap2.es.net> RMNET has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:4003::/32 having finished its 2-week review period. Note that it will take a short while for their pTLA inet6num entry to appear in the 6bone registry as they have to create it themselves. However, their registration is listed on: [To create a reverse DNS registration for pTLAs, please send the prefix allocated above, and a list of at least two authoritative nameservers, to hostmaster@ep.net.] Thanks, Bob From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Tue Apr 23 15:59:54 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 16:59:54 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <000701c1eabb$c477e420$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: <007d01c1ead7$86b8f0e0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On > Behalf Of Jeroen Massar > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 1:41 PM > To: rblechinger@noc.eurocyber.net > Cc: '6bone' > Subject: RE: 6bone Database cleansing? > > > > > > > I passed all these hosts to a patched version of fping6 > which skips > > > hosts without addrinfo (no AAAA ;) > > > > i have to aggree, there where many "application" lines with no AAAA > > record. i think some people doesn't know how to use this application > > entries. > > that's not what I meant, no addinfo means that a hostname's > IPv6 address > is not available in the DNS. > eg: > "application: ping 3ffe:8114::1" > or > "application ping ping.ipng.nl" > > Will both be 'correct' and work. But if I put a: > "application: ping ping.example.org" > it won't resolve, which is what the "no addrinfo" simply points out; > that there completely is no knowledge about a hostname. > Thus one can conclude that those hosts simply aren't maintained -> and > thus that those 6bone entries aren't maintained either. I suggest to add a verification like the AS or IPs block in the whois server for check if the host have a valid AAAA or A6 record. > > > > jeroen@tunnelserver:~$ cat output.txt | grep "no addrinfo" | wc -l > > > 329 > > > > 791 ping entries, 329 of them have no AAAA records.. that's are 41,6 > percent!! > > in my view, this is a little bit to high ;) > > > > maybe there should some checks when sending the template to > > the 6bone.db > No there should be a cleanup every month, and if a entry > seems invalid, > the tech-c etc should be contacted, > after 4 months of no reply they should be sacked. Ofcourse one could > argue that historic items should be conserved. > Then again we could also keep an archive of 6bone.db.gz's per month, > before they are cleansed. I agree with this. Best regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET From randy@ipcenta.de Tue Apr 23 16:58:03 2002 From: randy@ipcenta.de (Andreas 'randy' Weinberger) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 17:58:03 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? References: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> <3CC50C1D.BE5969A1@cybernet-ag.net> <20020423121101.GN21209@balios.org> Message-ID: <031901c1eadf$a6b06830$22005a0a@baby> hoi helios, > I should have a public DNS working soon... but for the application: > lines, where can I add these ? something like this in the 6bone whois db: application: domain dns1.v6bone.de or application: nntp news.v6bone.de > Cheers, > -- > Helios de Creisquer bye, --------- andreas 'randy' weinberger --------- internet system engineer, php development, sun microsystems workgroup computing expert & digitale videotechnik CompleTel GmbH (http://www.completel.de/) ------- From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Tue Apr 23 17:41:37 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 18:41:37 +0200 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <008c01c1eae5$bcab2e30$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On > Behalf Of Cleve Mickles > Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 4:00 PM > To: '6bone' > Subject: RE: 6bone Database cleansing? > > > > There are also a number of cases where companies have received > 6BONE allocations and have since gone out of business. Their > PTLA allocations may have been recovered by Bob but the registry > entries remain in the database. Is it possible to get these > removed as well? When folks see my pinger page it looks like the > 6Bone is having a terrible day in terms of reachability. > > I think it's a good idea. And delete pTLA of ISP who don't use their pTLA when this ISP have a sTLA. In my routing table, i don't have routes for this pTLA: ZAMA 3FFE:80F0::/28 6COM 3FFE:1900::/24 NTT-DOCOMO 3FFE:8370::/28 UL 3FFE:1B00::/24 SWISSCOM 3FFE:1E00::/24 UNI-C 3FFE:1400::/24 IPF 3FFE:3400::/24 MREN 3FFE:1700::/24 ANSNET 3FFE:0D00::/24 INFN-CNAF 3FFE:2300::/24 CAIRN 3FFE:1A00::/24 IFB 3FFE:0E00::/24 GLOBAL 3FFE:8340::/28 UCB-BR 3FFE:3A00::/24 SURFNET 3FFE:0600::/24 TELEPAC 3FFE:4000::/32 MOTOROLA-LABS 3FFE:4002::/32 Best Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET From michael@kjorling.com Tue Apr 23 18:58:40 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 19:58:40 +0200 (CDT) Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <031901c1eadf$a6b06830$22005a0a@baby> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 23 2002 17:58 +0200, Andreas 'randy' Weinberger wrote: > hoi helios, > > > I should have a public DNS working soon... but for the application: > > lines, where can I add these ? > > something like this in the 6bone whois db: > > application: domain dns1.v6bone.de > > or > > application: nntp news.v6bone.de I'm wondering - do I, as an end user site (with a /48), need to put in "application" entries in my 6bone whois ipv6-site object? As can be seen on http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?wolfpack, I don't have any now. Just don't want to be violating some standard or consensus. I would rather be part of the solution than part of the problem. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8xaDSKqN7/Ypw4z4RAvv4AJ4/9+Vf3R2q1Rd9TgMH0H9H+olqqACgg/hK HfK+rO/2+TApGAH1TeqPHnk= =KS7G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From david@IPRG.nokia.com Tue Apr 23 20:52:26 2002 From: david@IPRG.nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:52:26 -0700 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: ; from michael@kjorling.com on Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:58:40PM +0200 References: <031901c1eadf$a6b06830$22005a0a@baby> Message-ID: <20020423125226.O14467@iprg.nokia.com> Michael, On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 07:58:40PM +0200, Michael Kjorling wrote: > > > > > I should have a public DNS working soon... but for the application: > > > lines, where can I add these ? > > > > something like this in the 6bone whois db: > > > > application: domain dns1.v6bone.de > > > > or > > > > application: nntp news.v6bone.de > > I'm wondering - do I, as an end user site (with a /48), need to put in > "application" entries in my 6bone whois ipv6-site object? As can be > seen on http://whois.6bone.net/cgi-bin/whois?wolfpack, I don't have > any now. > > Just don't want to be violating some standard or consensus. I would > rather be part of the solution than part of the problem. It's totally optional. It allows you to help other try out ipv6 services on the network, or the other way around, people can test whether you have a network problem, and might be willing to drop you a mail when they find a problem. I hope this helps, David K. --- From lutchann-6bone@litech.org Wed Apr 24 04:07:25 2002 From: lutchann-6bone@litech.org (Nathan Lutchansky) Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 23:07:25 -0400 Subject: [OT] IPv6 applications in active use In-Reply-To: <009801c1ea21$2c4e16a0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net>; from nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com on Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 07:14:34PM +0200 References: <20020422082755.C22982@litech.org> <009801c1ea21$2c4e16a0$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> Message-ID: <20020423230725.G22982@litech.org> --KIzF6Cje4W/osXrF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 07:14:34PM +0200, Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote: > > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On=20 > > Behalf Of Nathan Lutchansky > > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 2:28 PM > >=20 > > The only services I use that don't have IPv6 support are=20 > > CUPS, X, and VNC. =20 > > IPv6 VNC would be really nice on the Windows side, but=20 > > considering that > > Windows support for everything is so unbelievably weak right=20 > > now I'm not > > surprised. >=20 > X and VNC have IPv6 support: >=20 > VNC 3.3.2r3: ftp://ftp.kame.net/pub/kame/misc/ Yes, it's geared for KAME though (natch) and it doesn't compile on Linux without a lot of hacking. I spent an hour getting the viewer to compile, and just gave up on the server. At any rate, most of my VNC connections are to Windows systems (tech=20 support and whatnot) so until the Win32 server supports IPv6, having an=20 IPv6-enabled Unix VNC package isn't much use to me. > XFree 3.3.3.1: http://cvsweb.pld.org.pl/ Yuck! I'm not recompiling the entire X package! :-) > I think CUPS too but i don't find the patch. I haven't found a patch for CUPS. If I get bored I'll write one. Anyway, the point of my last message was that much networking software really is becoming IPv6-ready "out of the box". We've been able to patch support into packages for a while, but that shouldn't be required. I should just be able to put a fresh Windows/RedHat/Debian/BSD install on a machine, plug it into an Ethernet segment with an IPv6 router on it, and have it WORK. On *nix systems, we're very nearly to that point now. > You can find a lot of informations about ipv6 support on (thank Peter > for this excellent page, don't forgot to update it): > http://bieringer.mirrors.fastnetxp.com/status/IPv6+Linux-status-apps.html Yes, Peter does an excellent job keeping up this resource. I send him=20 updates regularly. > If many people want help me to build a FTP with all ipv6 patchs, ipv6 > apps patched, ipv6 docs, and more; please contact me. Seems like the biggest problem that IPv6 catalogs have is that of becoming= =20 outdated. Peter Bieringer's site is the best one out there in terms of=20 tracking native and patched support in various apps and having up-to-date= =20 information. If you're serious about keeping a complete, up-to-date archive, good luck= =20 to you. -Nathan --=20 +-------------------+---------------------+------------------------+ | Nathan Lutchansky | lutchann@litech.org | Lithium Technologies | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ | I dread success. To have succeeded is to have finished one's | | business on earth... I like a state of continual becoming, | | with a goal in front and not behind. - George Bernard Shaw | +------------------------------------------------------------------+ --KIzF6Cje4W/osXrF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8xiFtTviDkW8mhycRAnr+AJ9RDoA36+x1DZPFPbmbsI0PfIK3KACgkgB9 ELHB/uAH9bnVWMaUeBeNM0k= =h1ZH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KIzF6Cje4W/osXrF-- From nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com Wed Apr 24 22:20:46 2002 From: nicolas.deffayet-extml@ndsoftwaregroup.com (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:20:46 +0200 Subject: [HOWTO] Use ASPath-tree with Zebra Message-ID: <026d01c1ebd5$e670d440$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> Hello, A lot of peoples ask me how use ASPath-tree with Zebra. I write a howto for help this peoples. You can see the result of this howto: http://noc.fastnetxp.com/stats/aspath-tree/bgp.html I wait your comments about this howto. If you have others methods that vtysh for get full bgp table, find errors,... don't hesitate to contact me ! Best Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET ---- HOWTO: Use ASPath-tree with Zebra Write by Nicolas DEFFAYET Version: 1.0 1/ Introduction 1.1) Copyright Copyright 2002 Nicolas DEFFAYET This HOWTO is free document; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. A copy of the license is available at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html This HOWTO is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details 1.2) Notes Get the last version of Zebra: http://www.zebra.org Get the last version of ASPath-tree: http://carmen.ipv6.tilab.com/ipv6/tools/ASpath-tree/index.html The default installation directory of Zebra is: /usr/local/ The default installation directory of ASPath-tree is: /usr/local/ASpath-tree/ 2/ Preparation of Zebra 2.1) If you don't have vtysh (in /usr/local/bin) Recompile Zebra with vtysh enabled: 1. Unpack the Zebra's tarball. 2. $ ./configure --enable-vtysh 3. $ make 4. Stop your Zebra's deamons. 5. $ make install 6. Restart your Zebra's deamons. 2.2) If you have vtysh (in /usr/local/bin) Now test if you get the full bgp table: /usr/local/bin/vtysh -e "show ipv6 bgp" Note: this command work only as root !!! 3/ Installation of ASPath-tree 3.1) Unpack the ASpath-tree's tarball in /usr/local/ASpath-tree 3.2) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/update-rtree Modify the perl path if it's not good. Change this line: my $CONFIGFILE = "/etc/ASpath-tree.config"; by: my $CONFIGFILE = "/usr/local/ASpath-tree/etc/ASpath-tree.config"; 3.3) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/lib/rsh-cisco.pl Change the line: open(OUTPUT,"$RSHDIR/rsh $ROUTERADDR -l $ROUTERUSER \"show bgp ipv6\" |"); by: open(OUTPUT,"$RSHDIR/vtysh -e \"show bgp ipv6\" |"); 3.4) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/etc/ASpath-tree.config Modify this variables: HOMEDIR = /usr/local/ASpath-tree RSHDIR = /usr/local/bin ROUTERADDR = localhost ROUTERUSER = router HTMLDIR = /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ CONTACTNAME = CONTACTMAIL = SITENAME = Read the comments of the configuration for more informations... 3.5) Create directory /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ 3.6) Update cron: 0,5,10,15,20,25,30,35,40,45,50,55 0-23 * * * /usr/local/ASpath-tree/update-rtree > /dev/null 2>&1 You can modify the delay beetween each updates. 3.7) For more informations, read /usr/local/ASpath-tree/readme.txt 4/ Running ASpath-tree ASpath-tree will be start every 5 minutes by cron and create html files in /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ ---- From zebra@zebra.org Wed Apr 24 22:20:46 2002 From: zebra@zebra.org (Nicolas DEFFAYET) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 23:20:46 +0200 Subject: [zebra 13448] [HOWTO] Use ASPath-tree with Zebra Message-ID: <026d01c1ebd5$e670d440$0103010a@localnet.ndsoftware.net> Hello, A lot of peoples ask me how use ASPath-tree with Zebra. I write a howto for help this peoples. You can see the result of this howto: http://noc.fastnetxp.com/stats/aspath-tree/bgp.html I wait your comments about this howto. If you have others methods that vtysh for get full bgp table, find errors,... don't hesitate to contact me ! Best Regards, Nicolas DEFFAYET ---- HOWTO: Use ASPath-tree with Zebra Write by Nicolas DEFFAYET Version: 1.0 1/ Introduction 1.1) Copyright Copyright 2002 Nicolas DEFFAYET This HOWTO is free document; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. A copy of the license is available at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html This HOWTO is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details 1.2) Notes Get the last version of Zebra: http://www.zebra.org Get the last version of ASPath-tree: http://carmen.ipv6.tilab.com/ipv6/tools/ASpath-tree/index.html The default installation directory of Zebra is: /usr/local/ The default installation directory of ASPath-tree is: /usr/local/ASpath-tree/ 2/ Preparation of Zebra 2.1) If you don't have vtysh (in /usr/local/bin) Recompile Zebra with vtysh enabled: 1. Unpack the Zebra's tarball. 2. $ ./configure --enable-vtysh 3. $ make 4. Stop your Zebra's deamons. 5. $ make install 6. Restart your Zebra's deamons. 2.2) If you have vtysh (in /usr/local/bin) Now test if you get the full bgp table: /usr/local/bin/vtysh -e "show ipv6 bgp" Note: this command work only as root !!! 3/ Installation of ASPath-tree 3.1) Unpack the ASpath-tree's tarball in /usr/local/ASpath-tree 3.2) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/update-rtree Modify the perl path if it's not good. Change this line: my $CONFIGFILE = "/etc/ASpath-tree.config"; by: my $CONFIGFILE = "/usr/local/ASpath-tree/etc/ASpath-tree.config"; 3.3) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/lib/rsh-cisco.pl Change the line: open(OUTPUT,"$RSHDIR/rsh $ROUTERADDR -l $ROUTERUSER \"show bgp ipv6\" |"); by: open(OUTPUT,"$RSHDIR/vtysh -e \"show bgp ipv6\" |"); 3.4) Edit /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/etc/ASpath-tree.config Modify this variables: HOMEDIR = /usr/local/ASpath-tree RSHDIR = /usr/local/bin ROUTERADDR = localhost ROUTERUSER = router HTMLDIR = /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ CONTACTNAME = CONTACTMAIL = SITENAME = Read the comments of the configuration for more informations... 3.5) Create directory /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ 3.6) Update cron: 0,5,10,15,20,25,30,35,40,45,50,55 0-23 * * * /usr/local/ASpath-tree/update-rtree > /dev/null 2>&1 You can modify the delay beetween each updates. 3.7) For more informations, read /usr/local/ASpath-tree/readme.txt 4/ Running ASpath-tree ASpath-tree will be start every 5 minutes by cron and create html files in /usr/local/ASpath-tree/www/ ---- From root@TheSocket.remoteserver.org Sat Apr 20 21:53:29 2002 From: root@TheSocket.remoteserver.org (Charlie ROOT) Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 20:53:29 +0000 (GMT) Subject: remove Message-ID: I Wanna Be Killed. r00t From yjchui@cht.com.tw Thu Apr 25 04:35:36 2002 From: yjchui@cht.com.tw (yjchu) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:35:36 +0800 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE Message-ID: <001a01c1ec0a$435e82e0$8d59900a@chttl.com.tw> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C1EC4D.517A96F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi: At present, there is no specification for PPPoE (IPv6). However, = What we will do in the future if we want to dial to IPv6 network through = ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather than dial-up connection in the future = IPv6 ADSL access? Thanks Yann-Ju Chu ChungHwa Telecom. Co. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C1EC4D.517A96F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="big5" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi:
    At = present, there is no=20 specification for PPPoE (IPv6). However, What we will do in the future = if we=20 want to dial to IPv6 network through ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather = than=20 dial-up connection in the future IPv6 ADSL access?
 
Thanks
 
Yann-Ju Chu
ChungHwa Telecom. = Co.
------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C1EC4D.517A96F0-- From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 25 05:32:13 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 13:32:13 +0900 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: yjchui's message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:35:36 +0800. <001a01c1ec0a$435e82e0$8d59900a@chttl.com.tw> Message-ID: <27746.1019709133@itojun.org> >Hi: > At present, there is no specification for PPPoE (IPv6). However, = >What we will do in the future if we want to dial to IPv6 network through = >ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather than dial-up connection in the future = >IPv6 ADSL access? fixed, permanent connectivity with static address is preferred than dialups, however: - there are cases where dialup is really necessary - like travelling notebooks. - there are needs for automating customer device configuration. so, a protocol for assigning prefix to customer would be nice. the topic is under discussion at IETF ipngwg. you may want to check the following: overview: draft-itojun-ipv6-dialup-requirement-02.txt protocol proposals: draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-00.txt (there are other proposals exist) IETF ipngwg minutes for last meeting (www.ietf.org) itojun From dave@dave.tj Thu Apr 25 06:23:21 2002 From: dave@dave.tj (Dave) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 01:23:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200204250523.g3P5NLI29874@dave2.dave.tj> Hmm ... anybody got a gun? Dave Cohen Charlie ROOT wrote: > > > I Wanna Be Killed. > > r00t > From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 25 07:08:31 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:08:31 +0900 Subject: news.bbc.co.uk NXDOMAIN problem fixed Message-ID: <28872.1019714911@itojun.org> ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <28866.1019714895.1@itojun.org> wow, it was quick! itojun ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-ID: <28866.1019714895.2@itojun.org> Content-Description: forwarded message Return-Path: simonl@rd.bbc.co.uk Delivery-Date: Thu Apr 25 15:06:45 2002 Return-Path: Delivered-To: itojun@itojun.org Received: from gateh.kw.bbc.co.uk (gateh.kw.bbc.co.uk [132.185.132.17]) by coconut.itojun.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE88E4B24 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:06:42 +0900 (JST) Received: from sunf0.rd.bbc.co.uk (ddmailgate.rd.bbc.co.uk [132.185.128.104]) by gateh.kw.bbc.co.uk (8.11.2/8.11.2) with SMTP id g3P66Zx23641; Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:06:35 +0100 (BST) Received: from sunf25.rd.bbc.co.uk by sunf0.rd.bbc.co.uk; Thu, 25 Apr 02 07:06:34 BST Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:06:32 +0100 From: Simon Lockhart To: Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: incorrect NXDOMAIN response from DNS server Message-Id: <20020425060630.GA3290@rd.bbc.co.uk> References: <26629.1019701827@itojun.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <26629.1019701827@itojun.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i X-Filter: mailagent [version 3.0 PL73] for itojun@itojun.org On Thu Apr 25, 2002 at 11:30:27AM +0900, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote: > there are name server implementations (probably load balancing product) > that responds with NXDOMAIN, when it should respond with NOERROR with > empty reply. one example is news.bbc.co.uk. Guilty as charged. Seems to only have been a problem since the deployment of IPv6 > do you know: > - name of particular implementation which have/had this bug? "BBC Intelligent Load Balancing DNS Server" > - other examples of nameservers that behave like this? > (windowsupdate.microsoft.com behaved like this in Feb 2002, but > they are already fixed) Oh, so it's not just us. > - how can we get people to fix it? (client side workaround should > not be populated, just to be sure) Name and shame seems to work ;-) I believe I have now fixed it. Please let me know if you think otherwise. Simon -- Simon Lockhart | Tel: +44 (0)1737 839676 Internet Engineering Manager | Fax: +44 (0)1737 839516 BBC Internet Services | Email: Simon.Lockhart@bbc.co.uk Kingswood Warren,Tadworth,Surrey,UK | URL: http://support.bbc.co.uk/ ------- =_aaaaaaaaaa0-- From hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp Thu Apr 25 07:21:25 2002 From: hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp (Hideaki Imaizumi) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:21:25 +0900 (JST) Subject: IPv6 BGP statistics Message-ID: <20020425152125K.hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp> Hi all, I mostly finished first version of IPv6 BGP perspective. http://www.ep.net/bgp-ipv6 I would very much appreciate having any comments or suggestions. I'm going to make this software available in about 1,2 weeks. Best regards, Hideaki Imaizumi From jorgen@hovland.cx Thu Apr 25 10:05:32 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:05:32 +0200 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE References: <27746.1019709133@itojun.org> Message-ID: <002501c1ec38$5d04bd80$034b2780@6115> Are you sure about that? We are using PPPoE with ipv6 and its working fine (IPCP6 or something). Joergen Hovland ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "yjchu" Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 6:32 AM Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE > >Hi: > > At present, there is no specification for PPPoE (IPv6). However, = > >What we will do in the future if we want to dial to IPv6 network through = > >ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather than dial-up connection in the future = > >IPv6 ADSL access? > fixed, permanent connectivity with static address is preferred than > dialups, however: > - there are cases where dialup is really necessary - like travelling > notebooks. > - there are needs for automating customer device configuration. > > so, a protocol for assigning prefix to customer would be nice. > the topic is under discussion at IETF ipngwg. > > you may want to check the following: > overview: > draft-itojun-ipv6-dialup-requirement-02.txt > protocol proposals: > draft-troan-dhcpv6-opt-prefix-delegation-00.txt > (there are other proposals exist) > IETF ipngwg minutes for last meeting (www.ietf.org) > > itojun > From jeroen@unfix.org Thu Apr 25 10:07:48 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:07:48 +0200 Subject: PuTTY 2002-04-25 IPv6 Message-ID: <001101c1ec38$acb79280$534510ac@cyan> Boo, A new version of PuTTY IPv6 has seen the daylight. Get it at: http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/ In short, the cool new stuff that now also works: - IPv6 tunneling. - X Forwarding over IPv6. - Issues. - much more... Greets, Jeroen >From the PuTTY IPv6 changelog, which will be in the CVS soon(tm): 8<-------------- * IPv6 patch 5 (25 April 2002) Jeroen Massar * - patch against CVS of yesterday, submitted as a 'cvs diff -u'. * - removed some 'old' debug statements. * - commented away ':' removal in window.c, which breaks direct IPv6 (eg 3ffe:8114::1) addressing. * We should find a neater workaround, common is to use [3ffe:8114::1]:22 (3ffe:8114::1 port 22). * - IPv6 tunnels work, including X forwarding. * - Added address to string conversion for IPv6 addresses. * - sk_newlistener() now sports an address_family argument. * PuTTY should give along the current connected IP version here. * Note that if we want to listen on both IPv4 and IPv6 we need to do two (2) sk_newlistener()'s * One for each protocol: sk_newlistener(..., AF_INET); sk_newlistener(..., AF_INET6); * - IPv6 builds (including tools) can be found on http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/ * They work on IPv4-only, IPv6-only and IPv4&IPv6 dualstacked hosts. -------------->8 From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 25 10:12:35 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:12:35 +0900 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: jorgen's message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:05:32 +0200. <002501c1ec38$5d04bd80$034b2780@6115> Message-ID: <729.1019725955@itojun.org> >Are you sure about that? We are using PPPoE with ipv6 and its working = >fine (IPCP6 or something). i guess we are (I am?) talking about different thing. IPv6CP works fine, yes. you can send IPv6 packet over PPPoE, yes. but IPv6CP does not dynamically pass prefix information to you. itojun From Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr Thu Apr 25 10:16:07 2002 From: Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr (Francis Dupont) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:16:07 +0200 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:35:36 +0800. <001a01c1ec0a$435e82e0$8d59900a@chttl.com.tw> Message-ID: <200204250916.g3P9G7T72639@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> In your previous mail you wrote: At present, there is no specification for PPPoE (IPv6). However, What we will do in the future if we want to dial to IPv6 network through ADSL? Or, we will use fixed rather than dial-up connection in the future IPv6 ADSL access? => there are 3 different questions: - IPv6 over PPPoE: there is *no* problem at all because PPP[oE] works with any datagram network protocol and IPv6 over PPP is standardized. - IPv6 for dialup: read the excellent answer by Itojun. - IPv6 ADSL: wait for ADSL hardware vendors. It seems some complete solutions are already available (so someone can/would provide IPv6 over ADSL to you). Regards Francis.Dupont@enst-bretagne.fr From mclin@sinica.edu.tw Thu Apr 25 10:28:54 2002 From: mclin@sinica.edu.tw (Ethern Lin) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 17:28:54 +0800 Subject: IPv6 BGP statistics References: <20020425152125K.hiddy@sfc.wide.ad.jp> Message-ID: <009201c1ec3b$a357a420$b8016d8c@sinica.edu.tw> Thank you Hideaki, It's a good tool for IPv6 BGP4+. I am looking forward to your release. Best Regards, Sincerely. ASNET Ethern Lin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Hideaki Imaizumi" To: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 2:21 PM Subject: IPv6 BGP statistics > Hi all, > > I mostly finished first version of IPv6 BGP perspective. > http://www.ep.net/bgp-ipv6 > > I would very much appreciate having any comments or suggestions. > I'm going to make this software available in about 1,2 weeks. > > Best regards, > Hideaki Imaizumi > From jorgen@hovland.cx Thu Apr 25 10:48:12 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:48:12 +0200 (CEST) Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <729.1019725955@itojun.org> Message-ID: Somehow that also works here :-) I dont remember exactly how. Either we changed the local scope prefix to a global one, or we used routeradvertisement. Joergen Hovland On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >Are you sure about that? We are using PPPoE with ipv6 and its working = > >fine (IPCP6 or something). > > i guess we are (I am?) talking about different thing. > IPv6CP works fine, yes. you can send IPv6 packet over PPPoE, yes. > but IPv6CP does not dynamically pass prefix information to you. > > itojun > From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 25 10:51:26 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:51:26 +0900 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: jorgen's message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 11:48:12 +0200. Message-ID: <1139.1019728286@itojun.org> >Somehow that also works here :-) >I dont remember exactly how. Either we changed the local scope prefix to a >global one, or we used routeradvertisement. router advertisement is one way you can use to assign /64 prefix to p2p link. but once you want to assign /48 behind the customer router, there's no standard protocol at this moment. itojun From jorgen@hovland.cx Thu Apr 25 11:16:37 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 12:16:37 +0200 (CEST) Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <1139.1019728286@itojun.org> Message-ID: Do you mean route a /48 prefix, which is not a static netblock, to the customer? Thats true. Joergen Hovland On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >Somehow that also works here :-) > >I dont remember exactly how. Either we changed the local scope prefix to a > >global one, or we used routeradvertisement. > > router advertisement is one way you can use to assign /64 prefix to > p2p link. but once you want to assign /48 behind the customer router, > there's no standard protocol at this moment. > > itojun > From jeroen@unfix.org Thu Apr 25 12:00:04 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 13:00:04 +0200 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <200204250916.g3P9G7T72639@givry.rennes.enst-bretagne.fr> Message-ID: <001801c1ec48$5e70b650$534510ac@cyan> Francis Dupont wrote: > - IPv6 ADSL: wait for ADSL hardware vendors. It seems some complete > solutions are already available (so someone can/would provide IPv6 > over ADSL to you). Some nice ADSL implementations use ATM bridging, thus giving you ADSL on the phoneside, and ethernet on the other, one does also see the MAC in the ARP table of the router... Hi-ho-native IPv6 ;) At least my Alcatel does this and many others are capable of doing it. Now all I have to do is convince my ADSL provider Greets, Jeroen From itojun@iijlab.net Thu Apr 25 12:37:46 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 20:37:46 +0900 Subject: Does anyone know where I should look to fix this please? In-Reply-To: robert's message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 15:29:02 +1000. <0a0c01c1ec1a$4fe16180$1a6001cb@chalmers.com.au> Message-ID: <1897.1019734666@itojun.org> >It doesn't appear to be actually causing any problems - I don't think >anyway? >Apr 25 15:27:57 nanguo sendmail[94293]: >gethostbyaddr(IPv6:2002:cb01:6005:1::1) failed: 1 >However- its a bit of a nuisance. >FreeBSD-4.5. declare reverse mapping in your DNS database, or have it in /etc/hosts. itojun From iching2101@yahoo.com Thu Apr 25 15:45:45 2002 From: iching2101@yahoo.com (SFS) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:45:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: remove In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020425144545.22415.qmail@web9102.mail.yahoo.com> remove --- J鴕gen_Hovland wrote: > Do you mean route a /48 prefix, which is not a static > netblock, to > the customer? > > Thats true. > > Joergen Hovland > > On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > > > >Somehow that also works here :-) > > >I dont remember exactly how. Either we changed the > local scope prefix to a > > >global one, or we used routeradvertisement. > > > > router advertisement is one way you can use to assign > /64 prefix to > > p2p link. but once you want to assign /48 behind the > customer router, > > there's no standard protocol at this moment. > > > > itojun > > > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more http://games.yahoo.com/ From fink@es.net Thu Apr 25 15:50:33 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 07:50:33 -0700 Subject: 6bone pTLA 3FFE:4004::/32 allocated to RESTENA-LU Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020425074849.0360e5c8@imap2.es.net> RESTENA-LU has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:4004::/32 having finished its 2-week review period. Note that it will take a short while for their pTLA inet6num entry to appear in the 6bone registry as they have to create it themselves. However, their registration is listed on: [To create a reverse DNS registration for pTLAs, please send the prefix allocated above, and a list of at least two authoritative nameservers, to hostmaster@ep.net.] Thanks, Bob From jorgen@hovland.cx Thu Apr 25 17:56:26 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:56:26 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Does anyone know where I should look to fix this please? In-Reply-To: <1897.1019734666@itojun.org> Message-ID: gethostbyaddr() ? Eeeeeeeek. What happened to getnameinfo() ? Joergen Hovland -The fine thing about standards is that there's so many of them. On Thu, 25 Apr 2002 itojun@iijlab.net wrote: > >It doesn't appear to be actually causing any problems - I don't think > >anyway? > >Apr 25 15:27:57 nanguo sendmail[94293]: > >gethostbyaddr(IPv6:2002:cb01:6005:1::1) failed: 1 > >However- its a bit of a nuisance. > >FreeBSD-4.5. > > declare reverse mapping in your DNS database, or have it in /etc/hosts. > > itojun > From ck@arch.bellsouth.net Thu Apr 25 19:02:45 2002 From: ck@arch.bellsouth.net (Christian Kuhtz) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 14:02:45 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <001801c1ec48$5e70b650$534510ac@cyan> Message-ID: bridged dsl is bad. very bad, in fact. and the train left the station in the other direction a long time ago. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU]On Behalf Of > Jeroen Massar > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 7:00 AM > To: 'Francis Dupont'; 'yjchu' > Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE > > > Francis Dupont wrote: > > > - IPv6 ADSL: wait for ADSL hardware vendors. It seems > some complete > > solutions are already available (so someone can/would > provide IPv6 > > over ADSL to you). > > Some nice ADSL implementations use ATM bridging, thus > giving you ADSL on > the phoneside, > and ethernet on the other, one does also see the MAC in the > ARP table of > the router... > Hi-ho-native IPv6 ;) > At least my Alcatel does this and many others are capable > of doing it. > > Now all I have to do is convince my ADSL provider > > Greets, > Jeroen > > From jeroen@unfix.org Thu Apr 25 22:48:24 2002 From: jeroen@unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 23:48:24 +0200 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002601c1eca2$ef880350$420d640a@unfix.org> Christian Kuhtz wrote: > bridged dsl is bad. very bad, in fact. "I don't like to eat because I don't like to eat it, it's a fact" And the biggest movie quote ever: "And then?" or what about "So what?" You could at least give some kind of hint what's so super bad about it. I only know of a _lot_ of happy users who realy are glad they don't have to use PPPoE ;) Fact because BBNed provides it to over 10.000 lines+, growing hard every day. (Nopes I don't have exact numbers, if you want them ask their PR people ;) > and the train left the station in the other direction a long time ago. "Nopes it went back and crashed into a mountain where they discovered gold" Any relevance please, you didn't even mention IPv6... Greets, Jeroen > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU]On Behalf Of > > Jeroen Massar > > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 7:00 AM > > To: 'Francis Dupont'; 'yjchu' > > Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU > > Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE > > > > > > Francis Dupont wrote: > > > > > - IPv6 ADSL: wait for ADSL hardware vendors. It seems > > some complete > > > solutions are already available (so someone can/would > > provide IPv6 > > > over ADSL to you). > > > > Some nice ADSL implementations use ATM bridging, thus > > giving you ADSL on > > the phoneside, > > and ethernet on the other, one does also see the MAC in the > > ARP table of > > the router... > > Hi-ho-native IPv6 ;) > > At least my Alcatel does this and many others are capable > > of doing it. > > > > Now all I have to do is convince my ADSL provider > > > > Greets, > > Jeroen From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 26 00:14:29 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 08:14:29 +0900 Subject: Does anyone know where I should look to fix this please? In-Reply-To: jorgen's message of Thu, 25 Apr 2002 18:56:26 +0200. Message-ID: <6539.1019776469@itojun.org> >gethostbyaddr() ? >Eeeeeeeek. >What happened to getnameinfo() ? unforfunately sendmail still uses gethostbyname2/gethostbyaddr. itojun From david@IPRG.nokia.com Fri Apr 26 01:34:02 2002 From: david@IPRG.nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2002 17:34:02 -0700 Subject: 6bone Database cleansing? In-Reply-To: <004401c1eaaa$c77aac90$8cf51150@local.comv6.com>; from wizard@italiansky.com on Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 11:39:34AM +0200 References: <007c01c1ea56$d5563bd0$420d640a@unfix.org> <004401c1eaaa$c77aac90$8cf51150@local.comv6.com> Message-ID: <20020425173402.A17766@iprg.nokia.com> Matteo, On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 11:39:34AM +0200, Matteo Tescione wrote: > The same results here, tried to ping the entire 6bone database "application > ping" but get only around 10%, 20% of hosts... > The question is: does anybody think to clean up the 6bone database? While humans have the natural instinct that everything needs to be kept tidy and cleaned, they always want to apply such tidyness rules the most to other people, while they usually cut themselves a bit more slack. For example, I am the maintainer of the registry, but I am also a user of the registry and I usually update my objects once in a couple of months instead of doing it after every tiny change that I make to my setup here. This saves me a lot of time while at the same time keeping the most important information available: my contact information is there and people can reach me if there is a problem. A public database by nature makes it very hard to police and stop people from putting incorrect data in there. In fact, if we would strengthen the rules that will make it harder to register garbage data, it will also make it harder for legitimate people to register their data. That in turn, usually causes the legitimate users not to put as much effort in keeping their data up to date anymore which in return causes all data to be become stale. I much rather err a bit on the side of making it easy to register things, than making it too hard. This causes some garbage to get through the system, but I have a big harddisk and there is really no problem with having extra, not used data/sites in the database. It really doesn't hurt me as the maintainer at all. Keeping data up to date is really ones own responsibility, if I don't update my contact information, people cannot reach me when *I* have a problem so I will get burned since the other party will most likely filter me out and I won't immediately know about it because my contact information was out of date. Having said this, I won't oppose at all any efforts to help the active sites in keeping their data up to date and clean. I can think of an automatic program that for example checks whether those reported applications really exist, and if they don't, an email gets send to the maintainer of that object to let them know that they either have a problem or that they might want to consider updating their object. If somebody has spare time to write such a program I would fully support him/her in doing so. The only thing that we have to make sure is that there are not going to be ten of such automatic programs and that they don't send out their emails every hour or so so users will not get annoyed by all this mail. >From the other direction, if people write programs to use the registry data, it makes a lot of sense to do some thinking on filtering out data that is obviously stale or incorrect. For example, one approach for a ping program could be to ping all the hosts, but not to report hosts that could not be reached for 7 days or longer. Of course, if people find totally obvious 'crap' in the database, they can certainly drop me a mail and I will take a look at it to address the problem. David K. --- From ggm@apnic.net Fri Apr 26 05:37:09 2002 From: ggm@apnic.net (ggm@apnic.net) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 14:37:09 +1000 Subject: buggy NXDOMAIN at NASA too? Message-ID: <2823.1019795829@garlic.apnic.net> I think spaceflight.nasa.gov displays the same symptom as newsbbc.bbc.net.uk I have mailed NASA to no avail. If anybody knows a contact who might get their DNS people to look at things... cheers -George -- George Michaelson | APNIC Email: ggm@apnic.net | PO Box 2131 Milton QLD 4064 Phone: +61 7 3858 3100 | Australia Fax: +61 7 3858 3199 | http://www.apnic.net From bjorn@mork.no Fri Apr 26 08:40:03 2002 From: bjorn@mork.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Bj=F8rn?= Mork) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 09:40:03 +0200 Subject: buggy NXDOMAIN at NASA too? In-Reply-To: <2823.1019795829@garlic.apnic.net> (ggm@apnic.net's message of "Fri, 26 Apr 2002 14:37:09 +1000") References: <2823.1019795829@garlic.apnic.net> Message-ID: ggm@apnic.net writes: > I think spaceflight.nasa.gov displays the same symptom as newsbbc.bbc.net.uk > > I have mailed NASA to no avail. If anybody knows a contact who might get > their DNS people to look at things... Did you try dns.support@nasa.gov? I also brought this discussion to the load balancing mailing list, since it's really more relevant there. The failure with ipv6 capable clients is just a symptom. Asking a negative caching resolver for a MX record would also cause these names to fail on that resolver. Bj鴕n From nileshks78@yahoo.com Fri Apr 26 14:10:04 2002 From: nileshks78@yahoo.com (nileshks78) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 06:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: tunnel to 6bone Message-ID: <20020426131004.6816.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> Hello all, I have global ipv6 addr from freenet6. So I have tunnel between my network and freenet6's network. Can i create another tunnel between my network and 6bone's network. If yes can any one give me remote ipv4 as well as ipv6 address of 6bone. And steps how should i go about. My plateform is Linux. Thanks in advance. Nilesh pes.edu ===== Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX.Love Linux forever........ Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. Living in the Brave World of IpV6. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more http://games.yahoo.com/ From itojun@iijlab.net Fri Apr 26 16:29:09 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 00:29:09 +0900 Subject: tunnel to 6bone In-Reply-To: nileshks78's message of Fri, 26 Apr 2002 06:10:04 MST. <20020426131004.6816.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <15897.1019834949@itojun.org> >Hello all, > >I have global ipv6 addr from freenet6. So I have >tunnel between my network and freenet6's network. Can >i create another tunnel between my network and 6bone's >network. > >If yes can any one give me remote ipv4 as well as ipv6 >address of 6bone. And steps how should i go about. My >plateform is Linux. if you can tell us - your IPv4 address, and if it is dynamic (like DHCP) or static - physical location (city/state) it will be easier for upstreams to contact you (closer the better). itojun From wizard@italiansky.com Fri Apr 26 16:44:24 2002 From: wizard@italiansky.com (Matteo Tescione) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 17:44:24 +0200 Subject: tunnel to 6bone References: <20020426131004.6816.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008701c1ed39$3dfe0160$8cf51150@local.comv6.com> if u have a tunnel with freenet6 you're already into 6bone's network :) hwhere u can have as many tunnel you want, Regards, Matteo Tescione Ipv6 Dept. COMV6 - Italy ----- Original Message ----- From: "nileshks78" To: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Friday, April 26, 2002 3:10 PM Subject: tunnel to 6bone > Hello all, > > I have global ipv6 addr from freenet6. So I have > tunnel between my network and freenet6's network. Can > i create another tunnel between my network and 6bone's > network. > > If yes can any one give me remote ipv4 as well as ipv6 > address of 6bone. And steps how should i go about. My > plateform is Linux. > > Thanks in advance. > > Nilesh > pes.edu > > ===== > Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX.Love Linux forever........ > > Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. > > Living in the Brave World of IpV6. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more > http://games.yahoo.com/ From michael@kjorling.com Fri Apr 26 18:21:27 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 19:21:27 +0200 (CDT) Subject: tunnel to 6bone In-Reply-To: <008701c1ed39$3dfe0160$8cf51150@local.comv6.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 26 2002 17:44 +0200, Matteo Tescione wrote: > if u have a tunnel with freenet6 you're already into 6bone's network :) > hwhere u can have as many tunnel you want, > > Regards, > Matteo Tescione > Ipv6 Dept. > COMV6 - Italy I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8yYyaKqN7/Ypw4z4RAqC5AJ9VtgxUqULM+8Htk6JgDRYhjk3uIQCeLNf/ N1AHC2hUl8BrHqZYRuI2YtQ= =kW9E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From pim@ipng.nl Fri Apr 26 19:12:28 2002 From: pim@ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 20:12:28 +0200 Subject: tunnel to 6bone In-Reply-To: <20020426131004.6816.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20020426131004.6816.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20020426181227.GB17496@bfib.colo.bit.nl> On Fri, Apr 26, 2002 at 06:10:04AM -0700, nileshks78 wrote: | Hello all, | | I have global ipv6 addr from freenet6. So I have | tunnel between my network and freenet6's network. Can | i create another tunnel between my network and 6bone's | network. | | If yes can any one give me remote ipv4 as well as ipv6 | address of 6bone. And steps how should i go about. My | plateform is Linux. I would like to take the time to bring to your attention that your platform is not ready for source based routing and you will end up sending packets from prefix A (tunnel A, freenet6) through the tunnel to ISP B (who should not be aggregating your traffic). Having more than one tunnel with different prefixes is technically possible, however from a redundancy point of view it will help you nothing. Let's say you use prefix A from freenet6 normally. If the tunnel to freenet6 fails (or freenet is broken), you might want to send your traffic through the other tunnel. That provider, 95% certainly, will not perform any sort of ingress filtering (tunnelbrokers are well known for being broken this way - pun intended :), and send your packet to the destination. That destination in turn will return the packet to freenet6 because the address you were using is from prefix A (which is freenet6 space). The packet will then not get back to you because your tunnel was down. So if I were you, I'd stick to one (1) tunnel to a nearby ISP. Reply with the IPv4 address and your upstream ISP (v4) and tell us if this IP is static or dynamic, and if it's up 24/7 or not. Thanks, good luck Pim van Pelt | | Thanks in advance. | | Nilesh | pes.edu | | ===== | Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX.Love Linux forever........ | | Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. | | Living in the Brave World of IpV6. | | __________________________________________________ | Do You Yahoo!? | Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more | http://games.yahoo.com/ -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim@ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Fri Apr 26 22:43:00 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2002 14:43:00 -0700 Subject: tunnel to 6bone Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C602@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> >> Matteo Tescione wrote: > if u have a tunnel with freenet6 you're already into 6bone's > network :) hwhere u can have as many tunnel you want, > Michael Kj鰎ling wrote: > I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? It does indeed require one as the only way to be multihomed today in IPv6 is to be a xTLA. Michel. From itojun@iijlab.net Sat Apr 27 00:48:50 2002 From: itojun@iijlab.net (itojun@iijlab.net) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 08:48:50 +0900 Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: michel's message of Fri, 26 Apr 2002 14:43:00 MST. <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046406C602@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: <19314.1019864930@itojun.org> >> I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? >It does indeed require one as the only way to be multihomed today in IPv6 is to be a xTLA. depending on what you mean by "multihoming" and what kind of failure you want to cope with. yes, if you want to do currently-practiced provider-independent address/ punching-hole routing info style multihoming, you need an ASN. RFC3178 is working just fine for me without ASN or provider-independent address/punching hole (basically, you get two /48 prefixes from two upstream provider, and you can cope with link failure to upstream). btw, i wonder why it is justified by people doing punching-hole style multihome, to taint/overload worldwide routing table for the benefit of a leaf site. i guess we need a better routing protocol, or something. itojun From bmanning@ISI.EDU Sun Apr 28 04:40:11 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2002 20:40:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: <19314.1019864930@itojun.org> from "itojun@iijlab.net" at "Apr 27, 2 08:48:50 am" Message-ID: <200204280340.g3S3eC711889@boreas.isi.edu> % >> I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? % >It does indeed require one as the only way to be multihomed today in IPv6 is to be a xTLA. % % depending on what you mean by "multihoming" and what kind of failure % you want to cope with. % yes, if you want to do currently-practiced provider-independent address/ % punching-hole routing info style multihoming, you need an ASN. % % RFC3178 is working just fine for me without ASN or provider-independent % address/punching hole (basically, you get two /48 prefixes from two % upstream provider, and you can cope with link failure to upstream). % % btw, i wonder why it is justified by people doing punching-hole style % multihome, to taint/overload worldwide routing table for the benefit of % a leaf site. i guess we need a better routing protocol, or something. % % itojun tainting/overloading the routing table for IPv6 is a non-issue at this point in time. Some 400 prefixes are active. What ought to be of more concern is the need to get a /48, -per provider- to deal w/ multihoming. This does not bode well for effective address conservation. But yes, we do need better routing protocols. --bill From pekkas@netcore.fi Sun Apr 28 17:00:47 2002 From: pekkas@netcore.fi (Pekka Savola) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 19:00:47 +0300 (EEST) Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: <200204280340.g3S3eC711889@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Bill Manning wrote: > % >> I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? > % >It does indeed require one as the only way to be multihomed today in IPv6 is to be a xTLA. > % > % depending on what you mean by "multihoming" and what kind of failure > % you want to cope with. > % yes, if you want to do currently-practiced provider-independent address/ > % punching-hole routing info style multihoming, you need an ASN. > % > % RFC3178 is working just fine for me without ASN or provider-independent > % address/punching hole (basically, you get two /48 prefixes from two > % upstream provider, and you can cope with link failure to upstream). > % > % btw, i wonder why it is justified by people doing punching-hole style > % multihome, to taint/overload worldwide routing table for the benefit of > % a leaf site. i guess we need a better routing protocol, or something. > % > % itojun > > tainting/overloading the routing table for IPv6 is > a non-issue at this point in time. [...] Sure, but stopping an avalanche is not an easy job. We haven't managed to kill irresponsible multihoming etc. with IPv4, so if we let go of these requirements, we'll probably never be able to prevent the future problems. When IPv6 routing table is at e.g. 5,000 entries, it may be too late to set any effective policies. We're seeing this now with IPv4 /24's etc. -- Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted, Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall" Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Sun Apr 28 19:19:06 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 11:19:06 -0700 Subject: multihoming Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFDE@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Bill, > Bill Manning wrote: > tainting/overloading the routing table for IPv6 is > a non-issue at this point in time. Some 400 prefixes > are active. What ought to be of more concern is the > need to get a /48, -per provider- to deal w/ multihoming. > This does not bode well for effective address conservation. You are missing the point, IMHO. Granted, a /48 per provider is not the most efficient allocation, but please keep in mind that there is an almost unlimited number of /48s. There is more than enough room in the 2000:3FFF space to give multiple /48s to each living person on earth, and also enough space to give multiple /64s to each light bulb in use. On the other end, there are practical limits to the size of the routing table, end even if we had unlimited CPU, memory and bandwidth resources it would become a manageability issue anyway. Michel. From lucifer@lightbearer.com Sun Apr 28 20:27:29 2002 From: lucifer@lightbearer.com (Joel Baker) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 13:27:29 -0600 Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: ; from pekkas@netcore.fi on Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 07:00:47PM +0300 References: <200204280340.g3S3eC711889@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: <20020428132729.A13171@lightbearer.com> On Sun, Apr 28, 2002 at 07:00:47PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote: > On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Bill Manning wrote: > > % >> I was under the impression that IPv6 multihoming required an ASN? > > % >It does indeed require one as the only way to be multihomed today in IPv6 is to be a xTLA. > > % > > % depending on what you mean by "multihoming" and what kind of failure > > % you want to cope with. > > % yes, if you want to do currently-practiced provider-independent address/ > > % punching-hole routing info style multihoming, you need an ASN. > > % > > % RFC3178 is working just fine for me without ASN or provider-independent > > % address/punching hole (basically, you get two /48 prefixes from two > > % upstream provider, and you can cope with link failure to upstream). > > % > > % btw, i wonder why it is justified by people doing punching-hole style > > % multihome, to taint/overload worldwide routing table for the benefit of > > % a leaf site. i guess we need a better routing protocol, or something. > > % > > % itojun > > > > tainting/overloading the routing table for IPv6 is > > a non-issue at this point in time. [...] > > Sure, but stopping an avalanche is not an easy job. We haven't managed to > kill irresponsible multihoming etc. with IPv4, so if we let go of these > requirements, we'll probably never be able to prevent the future problems. > > When IPv6 routing table is at e.g. 5,000 entries, it may be too late to > set any effective policies. We're seeing this now with IPv4 /24's etc. Once again... you cannot solve a social/business problem with technical limitations, effectively. People who have motivation will always find new and creative ways to get around them. People want multihoming, enough to pay for it - and pay well. This means that it WILL happen, whether you like it or not. You can manage to do it via IPv4-style ASN+1 netblock announcements (leading to fractured routing tables, but conservation of address space) or to IPv6/hierarchial style route-via-xTLA methods, where you have easy to manage routing tables, but blow lots of address space (because companies will have 1 block from each of their upstreams). The latter also requires protocols that support this kind of split natively and sanely, for long-term availability. I'd say something about research vs. production networks here, but I can't find any way to make it come out right. Suffice to say, most of us aren't working for DARPA at this point. -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/ From riel@conectiva.com.br Sun Apr 28 21:32:41 2002 From: riel@conectiva.com.br (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:32:41 -0300 (BRT) Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFDE@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> Message-ID: On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Michel Py wrote: > > Bill Manning wrote: > > tainting/overloading the routing table for IPv6 is > > a non-issue at this point in time. Some 400 prefixes > > are active. What ought to be of more concern is the > > need to get a /48, -per provider- to deal w/ multihoming. > > This does not bode well for effective address conservation. > > You are missing the point, IMHO. Granted, a /48 per provider is not the > most efficient allocation, but please keep in mind that there is an > almost unlimited number of /48s. > On the other end, there are practical limits to the size of the routing > table, end even if we had unlimited CPU, memory and bandwidth resources > it would become a manageability issue anyway. I guess this means for multihoming people just need multiple netblocks (/48s or /56es) and the next higher layer of the network stack needs to know about a host having multiple addresses. Good thing the SCTP people are already working on this. Note that something like SCTP will always scale ... if your server can handle 1000 connections, it can handle those 1000 connections with the remote ends having 4 possible addresses. Figuring out why routing tables don't grow linearly this nicely is left as an exercise for the reader ;) regards, Rik -- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ From nileshks78@yahoo.com Sun Apr 28 21:41:00 2002 From: nileshks78@yahoo.com (nileshks78) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 13:41:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: sit0 interface Message-ID: <20020428204100.32847.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> Hello all, If i encapsulate my v6 packets into v4, i have to use sit interface. But some people says you can not use sit0 interface its for some special purpost. Can any one tell me why should I can't use sit0. Thanks for Help. Nilesh. ===== Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX.Love Linux forever........ Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. Living in the Brave World of IpV6. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com From bmanning@ISI.EDU Sun Apr 28 22:17:47 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 14:17:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFDE@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> from Michel Py at "Apr 28, 2 11:19:06 am" Message-ID: <200204282117.g3SLHlm14748@boreas.isi.edu> % You are missing the point, IMHO. Granted, a /48 per provider is not the % most efficient allocation, but please keep in mind that there is an % almost unlimited number of /48s. There is more than enough room in the % 2000:3FFF space to give multiple /48s to each living person on earth, % and also enough space to give multiple /64s to each light bulb in use. How many /64s does each lightbulb get? One per manufacture? One per consumer? One per utility? One per neighborhood association? One per research project that wants to check on: (features of glass, filament degredation, market penetration...) Or are you making the tacit assumption that everyone gets enough space to address all the things that are of interest to them, with their OWN block of v6 space? IMHO, the whole point of CIDR in v4 was to address TWO problems, first, address exaustion. Delegation policies were increasingly finetuned to only delegate as much space as was really needed. second, a constraint on routing table size. % On the other end, there are practical limits to the size of the routing % table, end even if we had unlimited CPU, memory and bandwidth resources % it would become a manageability issue anyway. Granted, routing protocols of today are not robust in dealing with IPv6. It does not mean that we should hammer IPv6 into the IPv4 mold nor should you restrict your thinking to using v4 routing protocols for v6 address space. Neither the delegation problems nor the routing problems are tractable with current thinking. Hierarchical delegation/routing, while known to work, do not meet the wants of the user populace. They will find a way around what they perceive as impediments. % Michel. --bill From jochen@scram.de Sun Apr 28 23:00:53 2002 From: jochen@scram.de (Jochen Friedrich) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 00:00:53 +0200 (CEST) Subject: sit0 interface In-Reply-To: <20020428204100.32847.qmail@web13905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Nilesh, > sit0 interface its for some special purpost. sit0 is a point to multipoint interface and also supports dynamic tunnels. > Can any one tell me why should I can't use sit0. sit1, sit2, etc are real point to point interfaces. You can of course use both, but they are used differently. Cheers, --jochen From nileshks78@yahoo.com Sun Apr 28 23:59:20 2002 From: nileshks78@yahoo.com (nileshks78) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 15:59:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: scope Compat Message-ID: <20020428225920.86158.qmail@web13908.mail.yahoo.com> Hello All, When I give ifconfig sit0, in my linux machine, it displays some information abotu sit0. It says inet6 addr is ::202.4.187.94 Scope : compat What is Compat scope means? When others try ping6 ::202.4.187.94, it dosent reply. But when I try it form my machine only it replys. Can anyone clear my doubts. Thanks Nilesh pes.edu. ===== Best Things in Life are Free.......like LINUX.Love Linux forever........ Unix is very simple, but it takes a genius to understand the simplicity. Living in the Brave World of IpV6. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Mon Apr 29 01:07:38 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:07:38 -0700 Subject: multihoming Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFE0@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> > Bill Manning wrote: > How many /64s does each lightbulb get? I would say each light bulb get its own unique 64 bit MAC address. Given the typical lifespan of a light bulb GE will be able to recycle MAC addresses for light bulbs after some years. In my house, each light bulb is a /128 address present on three /64 subnets. I'm sure that everybody recognizes the vital role of managing an IPv-6 enabled light bulb to the point that each light bulb must be multihomed to at least three ISPs. It is none of the manufacturer's business neither the utility to know when my individual light bulbs are on. So, if I get three /48s for my home, I can have each room being a separate subnet, where light bulbs can be multihomed to three different ISPs And I still have addresses to spare. > Or are you making the tacit assumption that everyone > gets enough space to address all the things that are of > interest to them, with their OWN block of v6 space? Generally speaking, yes. I would say that any home owner _really_ interested in multihomed light bulbs will get a /48 block of portable-within-the-area, provider-independent addresses on top of few number of /48 PA blocks). However, I feel that a very large part of the world's population will be happy to manage their IPv6 light bulbs on a single-homed single-subnet with a /64 block of addresses provided by their ISPs. > IMHO, the whole point of CIDR in v4 was to address TWO > problems, first, address exaustion. Delegation policies > were increasingly finetuned to only delegate as much space > as was really needed. second, a constraint on routing table > size. Correct. Since address exhaustion is not a problem in v6, the idea is to allocate more addresses than one would ever need, because it will allow aggregation and therefore a reasonably manageable routing table size. > It does not mean that we should hammer > IPv6 into the IPv4 mold nor should you restrict your thinking > to using v4 routing protocols for v6 address space. I fully agree. > Neither the delegation problems nor the routing problems > are tractable with current thinking. Hierarchical > delegation/routing, while known to work, do not meet the > wants of the user populace. They will find a way around > what they perceive as impediments. I beg to differ. It is possible that you have not been following the current multihoming developments. Michel. From bmanning@ISI.EDU Mon Apr 29 01:41:01 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 17:41:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: multihoming In-Reply-To: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFE0@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> from Michel Py at "Apr 28, 2 05:07:38 pm" Message-ID: <200204290041.g3T0f1v09892@boreas.isi.edu> % > Bill Manning wrote: % > How many /64s does each lightbulb get? % % I would say each light bulb get its own unique 64 bit MAC address. Given % the typical lifespan of a light bulb GE will be able to recycle MAC % addresses for light bulbs after some years. In my house, each light bulb % is a /128 address present on three /64 subnets. I'm sure that everybody % recognizes the vital role of managing an IPv-6 enabled light bulb to the % point that each light bulb must be multihomed to at least three ISPs. % It is none of the manufacturer's business neither the utility to know % when my individual light bulbs are on. Your assumptions are noted. And they might be valid. But a manufacturer might want/need to know and a utility might want to meter usage. And I'm sure that I don't want either of them to have addresses on the private home network and they may not have agreements w/ the ISPs that have peering access. Then of course, they might have thier own network into the house... % So, if I get three /48s for my home, I can have each room being a % separate subnet, where light bulbs can be multihomed to three different % ISPs % And I still have addresses to spare. And link-local, site-local, and the ones for non-generic access ... Good thing Richard did that work on source address selection. % > Or are you making the tacit assumption that everyone % > gets enough space to address all the things that are of % > interest to them, with their OWN block of v6 space? % % Generally speaking, yes. I would say that any home owner _really_ % interested in multihomed light bulbs will get a /48 block of % portable-within-the-area, provider-independent addresses on top of few % number of /48 PA blocks). However, I feel that a very large part of the % world's population will be happy to manage their IPv6 light bulbs on a % single-homed single-subnet with a /64 block of addresses provided by % their ISPs. I think that is granting ISPs -WAY- too much control. Multiple networks are a good thing. Reduces single points of failure and all that. % > IMHO, the whole point of CIDR in v4 was to address TWO % > problems, first, address exaustion. Delegation policies % > were increasingly finetuned to only delegate as much space % > as was really needed. second, a constraint on routing table % > size. % % Correct. Since address exhaustion is not a problem in v6, the idea is to % allocate more addresses than one would ever need, because it will allow % aggregation and therefore a reasonably manageable routing table size. Yet. We are throwing them away really quickly, all in the name of routing table conservation. I remember when it was nearly as easy to get a /8 of v4 space as it is to get a /32 of v6 space. H ratios not withstanding, I remain concerned that most people think there are addresses to burn and that aggregation will solve the access problems. Neither has proven true in the past and I see nothing to show that things have changed. While it is true that aggregation can solve the routing problem, it won't solve the capture/access problem. People will not be content with a single point of failure. And the business case for being one of the "sanctioned" transit providers is nearly an irrestistable target. Being able to be in a position where whole industries, countries, etc. are -REQUIRED- to use my services to acheive "routablity" is something devoutly to be wished. Or a threat to be designed around, depending on your point of view. % > It does not mean that we should hammer % > IPv6 into the IPv4 mold nor should you restrict your thinking % > to using v4 routing protocols for v6 address space. % % I fully agree. % > Neither the delegation problems nor the routing problems % > are tractable with current thinking. Hierarchical % > delegation/routing, while known to work, do not meet the % > wants of the user populace. They will find a way around % > what they perceive as impediments. % % I beg to differ. It is possible that you have not been following the % current multihoming developments. You differ that people will find ways to get what they want? Or do you think that delegation and routing are tractable? WRT multihoming, It is possible and likely. There are way too many good people involved. % % Michel. % -- --bill From michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us Mon Apr 29 06:31:42 2002 From: michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us (Michel Py) Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 22:31:42 -0700 Subject: multihoming Message-ID: <2B81403386729140A3A899A8B39B046405DFE8@server2000.arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us> >>> Bill Manning wrote: >>> Neither the delegation problems nor the routing problems >>> are tractable with current thinking. Hierarchical >>> delegation/routing, while known to work, do not meet the >>> wants of the user populace. They will find a way around >>> what they perceive as impediments. >> I beg to differ. It is possible that you have not been >> following the current multihoming developments. > You differ that people will find ways to get what they want? > Or do you think that delegation and routing are tractable? Some people will find ways to get what they want for the price they're willing to pay for it, and some won't. I differ because I think that that there are ways to make hierarchical delegation/routing palatable to the user populace. Michel. From jorgen@hovland.cx Mon Apr 29 15:05:49 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (jorgen@hovland.cx) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:05:49 GMT Subject: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? Message-ID: <20020429.14054900@valis.iu.hio.no> Every day I get a lot of strange reverse dns requests. Does anybody know what it is? [snip] 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.73/32785 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.128.1/53 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.240.5/53 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed -joergen hovland WebOnline AS From bmanning@ISI.EDU Mon Apr 29 16:59:16 2002 From: bmanning@ISI.EDU (Bill Manning) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? In-Reply-To: <20020429.14054900@valis.iu.hio.no> from "jorgen@hovland.cx" at "Apr 29, 2 02:05:49 pm" Message-ID: <200204291559.g3TFxGP13625@boreas.isi.edu> hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. % Every day I get a lot of strange reverse dns requests. Does anybody know % what it is? % % % [snip] % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.73/32785 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 % b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 % b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 % 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 % 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.128.1/53 % 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.240.5/53 % 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed % % % -joergen hovland % WebOnline AS % -- --bill From ck@arch.bellsouth.net Mon Apr 29 17:45:04 2002 From: ck@arch.bellsouth.net (Christian Kuhtz) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:45:04 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <002601c1eca2$ef880350$420d640a@unfix.org> Message-ID: there's a difference between a user's perspective and service provider. i was stating the service provider side. bridged dsl is grandfathered, being phased out, and all new deployment for the past couple of years has been pppoe at the sp i'm most familiar with. the issues are around management and scalability of the service. as to relevance, the issue was how you'd get native ipv6 dsl service. you stated that bridged dsl was a great way to do it and i was trying to tell you that it may be the case from an ipv6 perspective, but that it is out of touch with most deployments i'm familiar with in the industry. anyone know how many lines of bbn are bridged dsl and are they still actively deploying bridged dsl today? thanks, chris (ck@arch.bellsouth.net in my day job, but not speaking for the company). > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeroen Massar [mailto:jeroen@unfix.org] > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 5:48 PM > To: 'Christian Kuhtz'; 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE > > > Christian Kuhtz wrote: > > > bridged dsl is bad. very bad, in fact. > "I don't like to eat because I don't like to > eat it, it's > a fact" > And the biggest movie quote ever: "And then?" or what about > "So what?" > > You could at least give some kind of hint what's so super > bad about it. > I only know of a _lot_ of happy users who realy are glad > they don't have > to use PPPoE ;) > Fact because BBNed provides it to over 10.000 lines+, > growing hard every > day. > (Nopes I don't have exact numbers, if you want them ask > their PR people > ;) > > > and the train left the station in the other direction a > long time ago. > "Nopes it went back and crashed into a mountain where they > discovered > gold" > Any relevance please, you didn't even mention IPv6... > > Greets, > Jeroen > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU > [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU]On Behalf Of > > > Jeroen Massar > > > Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 7:00 AM > > > To: 'Francis Dupont'; 'yjchu' > > > Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU > > > Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE > > > > > > > > > Francis Dupont wrote: > > > > > > > - IPv6 ADSL: wait for ADSL hardware vendors. It seems > > > some complete > > > > solutions are already available (so someone can/would > > > provide IPv6 > > > > over ADSL to you). > > > > > > Some nice ADSL implementations use ATM bridging, thus > > > giving you ADSL on > > > the phoneside, > > > and ethernet on the other, one does also see the MAC in the > > > ARP table of > > > the router... > > > Hi-ho-native IPv6 ;) > > > At least my Alcatel does this and many others are capable > > > of doing it. > > > > > > Now all I have to do is convince my ADSL provider > > > > > > Greets, > > > Jeroen > > From jorgen@hovland.cx Mon Apr 29 18:05:40 2002 From: jorgen@hovland.cx (=?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F8rgen_Hovland?=) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 19:05:40 +0200 Subject: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? References: <200204291559.g3TFxGP13625@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: <000d01c1efa0$1734d9f0$0200000a@hera> Sorry, I found out what caused it now. Its not a routing problem or anything, just needs some tweaking. If of any interests: It was caused by programs asking for the ipv6 ip (AAAA) when the host only had ipv4 ip(A). I guess we will be seeing more of that in the future :-) The nameserver converted the ipv6 request into an ipv6 ip, when it really was ipv4 (so thats why it went into 54fx:: -range). Our ns converts A/AAAA requests into ips in a predefined radix. The nameserver is zoneless and uses the actual host instead (great for /64 routeradvertised netblocks). -joergen hovland WebOnline AS ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Manning" To: Cc: <6bone@ISI.EDU> Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 5:59 PM Subject: Re: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? > > hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. > > > % Every day I get a lot of strange reverse dns requests. Does anybody know > % what it is? > % > % > % [snip] > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.222/4070 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 199.0.216.1/3995 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 26-04-2002 15:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 205.177.10.10/2182 > % 7.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 03:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 04:44 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.72/64037 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.219/58803 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:49 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.73/32785 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 193.88.13.218/53174 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.239.134.83/58393 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:50 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.41.46.71/46886 > % 2.8.8.c.c.a.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 05:58 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 16:38 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 16:57 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 27-04-2002 21:48 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 06:11 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 > % b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 11:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.179.32.3/32955 > % b.1.9.4.8.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.129.149/63624 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:00 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.30.137.200/48867 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.77.75.2/32814 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 13:02 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 217.98.96.2/3856 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:15 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.216.77.25/1036 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:16 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 213.186.65.104/53 > % 3.4.e.c.c.6.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:18 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 14:29 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 16:25 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 16:39 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.152.34/38664 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 28-04-2002 17:01 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 194.204.159.1/33148 > % 5.0.0.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 > % 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:06 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 195.212.29.2/35838 > % 2.0.4.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.128.1/53 > % 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:12 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 158.43.240.5/53 > % 3.c.3.9.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 > % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 13:24 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 > % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 202.139.83.3/53 > % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % 29-04-2002 15:23 DynDNSModule UDP[53] 137.92.1.1/53 > % 3.8.8.c.c.2.f.4.5.ip6.int not allowed > % > % > % -joergen hovland > % WebOnline AS > % > > > -- > --bill > From Sascha Bielski Mon Apr 29 19:25:29 2002 From: Sascha Bielski (Sascha Bielski) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:25:29 +0200 Subject: Re[2]: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? In-Reply-To: <200204291559.g3TFxGP13625@boreas.isi.edu> References: <200204291559.g3TFxGP13625@boreas.isi.edu> Message-ID: <11568956953.20020429202529@rdns.de> Dear Bill Manning, On Monday, 29. April 2002 at 17:59 you wrote: BM> hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. iirc that was some "old" testbed. still many 5xxx::/16 records in 6bone whois database... -- best regards, Sascha Bielski mailto:sb@rdns.de rdns.de admin team xs26.net German Coordination phone: +49 (0) 174 / 432 93 76 email: sb@rdns.de From tony@lava.net Mon Apr 29 20:47:06 2002 From: tony@lava.net (Antonio Querubin) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 09:47:06 -1000 (HST) Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 29 Apr 2002, Christian Kuhtz wrote: > there's a difference between a user's perspective and service > provider. i was stating the service provider side. bridged dsl is > grandfathered, being phased out, and all new deployment for the past > couple of years has been pppoe at the sp i'm most familiar with. the > issues are around management and scalability of the service. Actually we've found that bridged DSL is simpler than PPPOE. That simplicity leads to easier scalability because nothing special needs to be done on the client side for even the less popular OS just to get online. That's from the user perspective. The less the user has to do to get online, the better. That also leads to lower support costs on the service provider side. From ck@arch.bellsouth.net Mon Apr 29 20:46:32 2002 From: ck@arch.bellsouth.net (Christian Kuhtz) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 15:46:32 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: we really need to take this discussion offline. please email me privately if you'd like to continue to discuss this subject. thanks. From mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca Mon Apr 29 21:40:02 2002 From: mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca (Michael Richardson) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 16:40:02 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 29 Apr 2002 12:45:04 EDT." Message-ID: <200204292040.g3TKe2Z15323@marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> >>>>> "Christian" == Christian Kuhtz writes: Christian> there's a difference between a user's perspective and service Christian> provider. i was stating the service provider side. bridged dsl is Christian> grandfathered, being phased out, and all new deployment for the past Christian> couple of years has been pppoe at the sp i'm most familiar with. the Christian> issues are around management and scalability of the service. Well, it might be the going concern for residential, but almost no soho/business installations I'm familliar with will tolerate pppoe. There just isn't a point. We do not want the address negotiated, we do not need another password that could be divulged, and we *do* want some address space behind the box. PPPoE deployment ==> more NAT in my opinion. ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ From daniel@prisec.net Mon Apr 29 22:01:34 2002 From: daniel@prisec.net (Daniel Hirche) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 23:01:34 +0200 Subject: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? In-Reply-To: <11568956953.20020429202529@rdns.de> References: <11568956953.20020429202529@rdns.de> Message-ID: <31505943.1020121294@[172.16.2.2]> Sascha, --On Monday, April 29, 2002 8:25 PM +0200 Sascha Bielski wrote: > Dear Bill Manning, > > On Monday, 29. April 2002 at 17:59 you wrote: > > > BM> hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. > > iirc that was some "old" testbed. still many 5xxx::/16 records in > 6bone whois database... daniel@noc:~$ whois 54f8:: % RIPEdb(3.0.0b2) with ISI RPSL extensions % No entries found in 6BONE database. There may still be some 5xxx:: inet6num objects listed in 6bone-db, but they are NOT delegated. That's what Bill said. Regards, --Daniel From ck@arch.bellsouth.net Mon Apr 29 23:30:44 2002 From: ck@arch.bellsouth.net (Christian Kuhtz) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 18:30:44 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <200204292040.g3TKe2Z15323@marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> Message-ID: pppoe and more than one address is not mutually exclusive. > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Richardson [mailto:mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca] > Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:40 PM > To: Christian Kuhtz > Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU > Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE > > > > >>>>> "Christian" == Christian Kuhtz writes: > Christian> there's a difference between a user's > perspective and service > Christian> provider. i was stating the service > provider side. bridged dsl is > Christian> grandfathered, being phased out, and all new > deployment for the past > Christian> couple of years has been pppoe at the sp i'm > most familiar with. the > Christian> issues are around management and scalability > of the service. > > Well, it might be the going concern for residential, but > almost no soho/business > installations I'm familliar with will tolerate pppoe. > There just isn't a > point. We do not want the address negotiated, we do not > need another password > that could be divulged, and we *do* want some address space > behind the box. > > PPPoE deployment ==> more NAT in my opinion. > > ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. > | firewalls [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, > ON |net architect[ > ] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ From michael@kjorling.com Tue Apr 30 00:01:14 2002 From: michael@kjorling.com (Michael Kjorling) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 01:01:14 +0200 (CDT) Subject: Re[2]: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? In-Reply-To: <11568956953.20020429202529@rdns.de> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Apr 29 2002 20:25 +0200, Sascha Bielski wrote: > BM> hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. > > iirc that was some "old" testbed. still many 5xxx::/16 records in > 6bone whois database... I seem to recall having read something about that, somewhere - but it's got to have been a long time ago, because there is no way you can squeeze 5000::/4 (format prefix %010 == 4000::/3) into the IPv6 globally aggregatable address range (which has a format prefix of %001, making for 2000::/3 - anyone recognizes that range?) Of course, it's late at night and I may be way out of whack here. Michael Kj鰎ling - -- Michael Kj鰎ling -- Programmer/Network administrator ^..^ Internet: michael@kjorling.com -- FidoNet: 2:204/254.4 \/ PGP: 95f1 074d 336d f8f0 f297 6a5b 2aa3 7bfd 8a70 e33e ``And indeed people sometimes speak of man's "bestial" cruelty, but this is very unfair and insulting to the beasts: a beast can never be so cruel as a man, so ingeniously, so artistically cruel.'' (Ivan Karamazov, in Dostoyevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov') -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key is at http://michael.kjorling.com/contact/pgp.html iD8DBQE8zdC9KqN7/Ypw4z4RAk8sAKDN0NLMa1kLgu7MJf08uOM5wMfv1ACdE2lT YcyQ+amfNsY+NBkACs0avJE= =T0EY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From fink@es.net Tue Apr 30 01:00:28 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 17:00:28 -0700 Subject: Re[2]: whats the deal with 54fx:: ? In-Reply-To: References: <11568956953.20020429202529@rdns.de> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020429162313.02608008@imap2.es.net> Michael, At 01:01 AM 4/30/2002 +0200, Michael Kjorling wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Apr 29 2002 20:25 +0200, Sascha Bielski wrote: > > > BM> hijacked address space? 54f8:: is not delegated. > > > > iirc that was some "old" testbed. still many 5xxx::/16 records in > > 6bone whois database... > >I seem to recall having read something about that, somewhere - but >it's got to have been a long time ago, because there is no way you can >squeeze 5000::/4 (format prefix %010 == 4000::/3) into the IPv6 >globally aggregatable address range (which has a format prefix of >%001, making for 2000::/3 - anyone recognizes that range?) I'll cover the history here for the record for 5F00::/8 prefixes, but will note that 54F8::/16 isn't covered by this history, so Bill is correct in saying it is hijacked (even if by accident :-). The original and now obsolete IPv6 Provider-Based Unicast address format was specified in RFC2073: It specified a 4000::/3 prefix as follows based on the then IPv6 Address Architecture in RFC1884 (which even reserved some space for Geographic-Based Unicast Addresses :-): > | 3 | 5 bits | n bits | 56-n bits | 64 bits | > +---+----------+------------+--------------+--------------------+ > |010|RegistryID| ProviderID | SubscriberID | Intra-Subscriber | > +---+----------+------------+--------------+--------------------+ Then a Testing Address Allocation was made in RFC1897 for the 6bone: which specified 5F00::/8 as follows: > | 3 | 5 bits | 16 bits | 8 | 24 bits | 8 | 16 bits|48 bits| > +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+ > | | |Autonomous| | IPv4 | | Subnet | Intf. | > |010| 11111 | System |RES| Network |RES| | | > | | | Number | | Address | | Address| ID | > +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+ The Provider-Based Unicast address format was then replaced by the IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format which is specified in RFC2374: It specified a format as follows, which is part of the revised IPv6 Address Architecture in RFC2373 (and currently being updated as we speak): > | 3| 13 | 8 | 24 | 16 | 64 bits | > +--+-----+---+--------+--------+--------------------------------+ > |FP| TLA |RES| NLA | SLA | Interface ID | > | | ID | | ID | ID | | > +--+-----+---+--------+--------+--------------------------------+ Then a new IPv6 Testing Address Allocation was made in RFC2471 for the 6bone (replacing RFC1897): which specified the well known 3FFE::/16 format. There was a small amount of activity under the old 5F00::/8 format through 1998. After that time it was supposed to go away, and mostly has, although a tiny bit of these 5F prefixes pop up from time to time. Hope this at least recovers some history rapidly being forgotten. Bob From bo@bbyrd.net Tue Apr 30 01:14:37 2002 From: bo@bbyrd.net (Bo Byrd) Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 20:14:37 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <200204292040.g3TKe2Z15323@marajade.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> Message-ID: <000401c1efdc$06da54e0$0202a8c0@biz.mindspring.com> Actually most business dsl setups are either at or moving to PPPoA, with is very similar to PPPoE. PPPoE uses a DSL modem, and, if wanted, a broadband router for NAT. PPPoA is a system where the device at the customer prem is an actual router, (a DSL Router) that terminates PPP over an ATM pvc that rides the DSL circuit. The service provider then routes a subnetwork to that DSL router. The router performs the username and password combo to the service providers equipment. All the customer sees is the network on the ethernet side of the router. PPPoE lets service providers oversubscribe their DSL termination routers. If just regular bridged connections were used a router can only handle so many (8000 for redback sms-1800 routers) of those circuits. With PPPoE the service provider can terminate many more circuits since not everyone is using the system at the same time. This greatly recudes the per-user cost of the equipment for the service provider. It also works the same as a dialup connection that the user is already familiar with. There really arent many problems with PPPoE at all. It's very more scalable than bridged RFC1483 operation. -----Original Message----- From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of Michael Richardson Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:40 PM To: Christian Kuhtz Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: Re: about IPv6 PPPoE >>>>> "Christian" == Christian Kuhtz writes: Christian> there's a difference between a user's perspective and service Christian> provider. i was stating the service provider side. bridged dsl is Christian> grandfathered, being phased out, and all new deployment for the past Christian> couple of years has been pppoe at the sp i'm most familiar with. the Christian> issues are around management and scalability of the service. Well, it might be the going concern for residential, but almost no soho/business installations I'm familliar with will tolerate pppoe. There just isn't a point. We do not want the address negotiated, we do not need another password that could be divulged, and we *do* want some address space behind the box. PPPoE deployment ==> more NAT in my opinion. ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mcr@sandelman.ottawa.on.ca http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ From cdel@firsthand.net Tue Apr 30 09:59:35 2002 From: cdel@firsthand.net (Christian de Larrinaga) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 09:59:35 +0100 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <000401c1efdc$06da54e0$0202a8c0@biz.mindspring.com> Message-ID: > PPPoE lets service providers oversubscribe their DSL termination > routers. If just regular bridged connections were used a router can > only handle so many (8000 for redback sms-1800 routers) of those > circuits. With PPPoE the service provider can terminate many more > circuits since not everyone is using the system at the same time. This > greatly recudes the per-user cost of the equipment for the service > provider. It also works the same as a dialup connection that the user > is already familiar with. There really arent many problems with PPPoE > at all. It's very more scalable than bridged RFC1483 operation. so this is what is meant by ADSL contention ratio? e.g., BT in UK quote 20:1? is BT is over subscribing DSL termination routers 20x? Christian Christian de Larrinaga From tapas.das@teleweb.net.in Tue Apr 30 11:04:10 2002 From: tapas.das@teleweb.net.in (Tapas Das) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 15:34:10 +0530 Subject: sit0 interface In-Reply-To: Message-ID: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C1F05C.7921A4B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am getting this error, can somebody pls help me .... --- Start of configuration script. --- Script: linux.sh sit1 setup Setting up link to 206.123.31.114 ioctl: No such device [here is the error] Error while executing /sbin/ip Command: /sbin/ip tunnel add sit1 mode sit ttl 64 remote 206.123.31.114 Closing, exit status: 0 Exiting with return code : 0 (0 = no error) thanx in advance Tapas Das. ------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C1F05C.7921A4B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am getting this error, can somebody pls help me=20 ....


--- Start of configuration script. ---
Script: =20 linux.sh
sit1 setup
Setting up link to 206.123.31.114
ioctl: No = such=20 device           &= nbsp;    =20 [here is the error]
Error while = executing=20 /sbin/ip
   Command: /sbin/ip tunnel add sit1 mode sit ttl = 64=20 remote 206.123.31.114
Closing, exit status: 0
Exiting with return = code : 0=20 (0 =3D no error)

 

thanx in advance

Tapas Das.

 

------=_NextPart_000_0013_01C1F05C.7921A4B0-- From jochen@scram.de Tue Apr 30 12:48:40 2002 From: jochen@scram.de (Jochen Friedrich) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 13:48:40 +0200 (CEST) Subject: sit0 interface In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Tapas Das, > ioctl: No such device [here is the error] > Error while executing /sbin/ip > Command: /sbin/ip tunnel add sit1 mode sit ttl 64 remote 206.123.31.114 > Closing, exit status: 0 > Exiting with return code : 0 (0 = no error) modprobe ipv6 Cheers, --jochen From bo@bbyrd.net Tue Apr 30 13:24:16 2002 From: bo@bbyrd.net (Bo Byrd) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:24:16 -0400 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c1f041$f5054bb0$0202a8c0@biz.mindspring.com> 20:1 seems very extreme. From what I've seen a subscriber management system can terminate around 32000 PVC's and can support 8000 active PVC's, that's 4:1. Of course for the best interests of the customers you cant normally run it like that, for best performance you usually see around 3:1 in datacenters with multiple SMS devices. Surely 20:1 is in reference to some other set of figures. -Bo -----Original Message----- From: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU [mailto:owner-6bone@ISI.EDU] On Behalf Of Christian de Larrinaga Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 5:00 AM To: Bo Byrd; 6bone@ISI.EDU Subject: RE: about IPv6 PPPoE > PPPoE lets service providers oversubscribe their DSL termination > routers. If just regular bridged connections were used a router can > only handle so many (8000 for redback sms-1800 routers) of those > circuits. With PPPoE the service provider can terminate many more > circuits since not everyone is using the system at the same time. > This greatly recudes the per-user cost of the equipment for the > service provider. It also works the same as a dialup connection that > the user is already familiar with. There really arent many problems > with PPPoE at all. It's very more scalable than bridged RFC1483 > operation. so this is what is meant by ADSL contention ratio? e.g., BT in UK quote 20:1? is BT is over subscribing DSL termination routers 20x? Christian Christian de Larrinaga From fink@es.net Tue Apr 30 15:54:31 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 07:54:31 -0700 Subject: 6bone pTLA 3FFE:4005::/32 allocated to KEWLIO Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020430075059.0275e210@imap2.es.net> KEWLIO has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:4005::/32 having finished its 2-week review period. Note that it will take a short while for their pTLA inet6num entry to appear in the 6bone registry as they have to create it themselves. However, their registration is listed on: [To create a reverse DNS registration for pTLAs, please send the prefix allocated above, and a list of at least two authoritative nameservers, to hostmaster@ep.net.] Thanks, Bob From fink@es.net Tue Apr 30 16:14:27 2002 From: fink@es.net (Bob Fink) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 08:14:27 -0700 Subject: Internet2 Land Speed Record award for IPv6 Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20020430075736.02757c20@imap2.es.net> 6bone Folk, I am passing along a request I think our community should be interested in: participating in the Internet 2's Land Speed Record project for IPv6, which you can read about at: These folk have created a category for IPv6 (so you don't have to compete against IPv4 for speed) but have had no entrants to date. This is fertile ground to prove what IPv6 can do. (Note that, contrary to the web site statement, there is currently no financial reward, just a very nice engraved plaque, a press release, and a formal presentation at an Internet 2 member meeting). The record is set similar to other international awards projects, requiring a 10% improvement over a previous record to decide when a new record has been set. I have been told that the closing date requirement for applicants has been removed (contrary to the web site writeup). Please take a look and see if we can start setting IPv6 speed records. Who knows, as this develops we may be able to compete with IPv4 speed records, which currently is: >A team from the University of Washington, the Information Sciences >Institute of the University of Southern California, Qwest and Microsoft >set a new standard for Internet performance by transferring 8.4 GB worth >of data from Redmond, Washington to Arlington, Virginia (5,626 Km) in 81 >seconds at a rate of over 830 megabits per second. They won both the >single stream and multistream classes of the I2-LSR competition. Maybe we should have an additional category for tunneled networks as well. Please contact if you want to know more. Thanks, Bob From lucifer@lightbearer.com Tue Apr 30 23:51:24 2002 From: lucifer@lightbearer.com (Joel Baker) Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2002 16:51:24 -0600 Subject: about IPv6 PPPoE In-Reply-To: <000301c1f041$f5054bb0$0202a8c0@biz.mindspring.com>; from bo@bbyrd.net on Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 08:24:16AM -0400 References: <000301c1f041$f5054bb0$0202a8c0@biz.mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20020430165124.A3979@lightbearer.com> On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 08:24:16AM -0400, Bo Byrd wrote: > 20:1 seems very extreme. From what I've seen a subscriber management > system can terminate around 32000 PVC's and can support 8000 active > PVC's, that's 4:1. Of course for the best interests of the customers > you cant normally run it like that, for best performance you usually see > around 3:1 in datacenters with multiple SMS devices. Surely 20:1 is in > reference to some other set of figures. Bandwidth subscription rates typically go at *least* 20:1 for residential DSL; sometimes 30:1. This is not, actually, a problem for most situations, if combined with proper monitoring of the circuit and engineers who grok how statistical multiplexing works and when you shouldn't be using it. (FWIW: observed traffic showed about a 10:1 ration of capacity:traffic on a device terminating business T1 customers, at least 2-3 of which were running their lines full-bore 24x7; the business DSL folks ended up being something between 15:1 and 20:1, and all of those customers pay lots of money to never have a bottleneck inside the providers network; that's *not* what residential customers pay for, and so they aren't guaranteed it, and sometimes end up 30:1, or even 40:1 in one rumored instance). The statistics in question were taken over the span of a month and a half, at 5 minute intervals, and processed extensively (some of it useful, much of it for making pretty graphs to prove to the people paying for upstream circuits that they couldn't safely try to multiplex 30:1 on the business T1s, even having hundreds of customers). -- *************************************************************************** Joel Baker System Administrator - lightbearer.com lucifer@lightbearer.com http://users.lightbearer.com/lucifer/