November 2017 - ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Results of the RIPE NCC Hackathon Version 6
by Vesna Manojlovic 28 Nov '17

28 Nov '17

Dear IPv6-wg, the topic of sixth RIPE NCC hackathon was, appropriately, IPv6 :) The highlights of the event: * 32 people from 18 countries participated * 6 projects were finalized * most future impact: ICMPv6 support for libpcap * most educational: Pocket Internet (lab of VM pods) * mostly covered topic: visualizing IPv6 deployment * most data used: RIPE Atlas traceroutes Please read the full report, with all the links, here: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/becha/results-hackathon-version-6 If you use one of the projects for your work, implement it or make further modifications, I would love to hear about it! Regards, Vesna

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 Week Denmark
by Mirjam Kuehne 22 Nov '17

22 Nov '17

Dear colleagues, An IPv6 week is an opportunity to raise awareness and stimulate IPv6 deployment on a national level. It brings a wide variety of stakeholders, knowledge and experience to a country where deployment of IPv6 is low. One of the key factors affecting the success of a national IPv6 week is support from the local community. In Copenhagen, we were very happy to have assistance from DKNOG in preparing and delivering this event. You can now find a report on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/nathalie_nathalie/ipv6-week-denmark Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: IPv6-only? IPv4-as-a-service?
by Mirjam Kuehne 03 Nov '17

03 Nov '17

Dear colleagues, Please find this new article by Jordi Palet on RIPE Labs: IPv6-only? IPv4-as-a-service? We are starting to hear “IPv6-only” more often. However, it doesn't seem to be clear what exactly this means. Read Jordi's explanation: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/jordipaletm/ipv6-only-ipv4-as-a-service Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC

1 0

Looking for a secon opinion on using ULA along with GUA for residential access
by Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN 01 Nov '17

01 Nov '17

Hello, During the evaluation of a new model of CPE for our residential access we found one of the suppliers providing an option to announce a ULA prefix in addition to the GUA prefix obtained from DHCP-PD. I would like some second opinions regarding auch a practice. >From my point of view, if ULA is enabled: - it allows the client's LAN to stay IPv6-enabled even when the internet connection is down. It is a simpler version compared to the use of link-locals. - if the "auto" version of the setting is used, the ULA prefix will risk changing when changing the CPE, which is less than optimal. If ULA is disabled: - business as usual; when internet is down the client will only have RFC1918 (v4) + link-local (v6) So, is it worth enabling an additional ULA on the LAN ? -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN

3 2

New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 Address Planning in GavleNet
by Mirjam Kuehne 01 Nov '17

01 Nov '17

Dear colleagues, Here's a new article by Torbjorn Eklov on RIPE Labs in which he describes how he helped a municipality network to deploy native IPv6 for fibre-to-the-home customers: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/teklov/ipv6-address-planning-in-gavlenet If you have any thoughts or comments on Torbjorn's article, please sign in to RIPE NCC Access and post them below the article. Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC

1 0