- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Address space analysis
by Peter van Eijk 25 May '10

25 May '10

Hello all, You might be interested in my circleid post: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100524_the_digital_divide_on_ip_addresses/ The version on http://www.petersgriddle.net also has an embedded spreadsheet. Regards Peter van Eijk, +31 6 2268 4939, peter @ digitalinfrastructures.nl

1 0

Today's xkcd
by Shane Kerr 19 May '10

19 May '10

http://xkcd.com/742/ I think I'm going to have nightmares... -- Shane

5 4

test-ipv6.com
by Jason Fesler 14 May '10

14 May '10

Shane Kerr suggested I post this here; that some of you may find it useful. http://test-ipv6.com or http://aaaa.test-ipv6.com The intent of this site is to help the user what it will mean when publishers start publishing dual-stack. When it makes sense, the test will be updated to indicate what the future looks like when publishers are IPv6 only. The dual stack publishing case is an open question that has been discussed between content and access providers. Measurements published by Google indicate a number of users with IPv6 enabled, routes installed, but the connectivity fails. In this situation, from the user's perspective, the site is down, and the user will go to the competitor's site (Still "up", IPv4 only). Followup measurements by other parties (Tore Anderson published some data; I've seen private data by other organizations) confirm the scale of the numbers Google has seen. While content providers will continue to do their own measurements (whether publicly or privately), they won't likely be indicating to the "broken" users what fate they are facing or how to fix it. This is where I hope something like my site can help, in a brand-neutral way. Please review the FAQ; and if you have comments feel free to send them to me. The site will automatically show a survey form if you have results I don't fully understand; if you see it pop up, please fill it out with contact details in case I need to ask more questions. I've seen lots of crazy things so far! Note: This is a side project of mine, not an employer's. As such, resources are limited. Please don't post this to slashdot - I'm not appropriately resourced for it (both for hardware and finances). -- Jason Fesler, email/jabber <jfesler(a)gigo.com> resume: http://jfesler.com "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."

4 3

IPv6 CPEs
by Dez 12 May '10

12 May '10

Following up on Marco's very informative presentation about IPv6 CPEs I was wondering if any of the CPEs mentioned, were tested with 2 ppp sessions (a v4 and a v6 one) at the same time. I know we've tried this setup with the ciscos (87x,88x) and I was curious to find out if other CPEs support that (and how easy it is to configure) and if anyone has tried this setup regards, Yannis

2 1

internal additional IPv4 assignment policy
by Lubos Pinkava 12 May '10

12 May '10

Hello, I've raised an idea concerning additional IPv4 assignments for our customers during RIPE60 beering with quite positive responses, so I would like to share it here and maybe get some additional feedback. We are a company running ISP/collocation business, promoting IPv6 since 2003 and already having substantial amount of IPv6 enabled customers. In our point of view, it's still pretty slow growth. What I indend to propose for our operations - active imediately - is this: - all customers requesting additional /25 (variable) shall have IPv6 assigned and asked for trying it (if not already done before) - all customers requesting additional /24 (variable) must already have active v6 services running (eg. NS/MX/web site for the beginning) There were several other ISP's interested, each of course with own specifics - but in general, we have agreed, that this can speed up IPv6 adoption especially in collocation / infastructure area and can still go through company processes. If there are more people interested, we can create some best practice document backing up our work. Any thoughts on this subject? Lubos Pinkava Casablanca INT s.r.o.

3 4

Re: [ipv6-wg] internal additional IPv4 assignment policy
by Geoffroy RIVAT 06 May '10

06 May '10

Hi, In-Reply-To: <4BE2BAAD.1040906(a)casablanca.cz> Lubos Pinkava wrote: > Hello, > > I've raised an idea concerning additional IPv4 assignments for our > customers during RIPE60 beering with quite positive responses, so I > would like to share it here and maybe get some additional feedback. > > We are a company running ISP/collocation business, promoting IPv6 > since 2003 and already having substantial amount of IPv6 enabled > customers. In our point of view, it's still pretty slow growth. > > What I indend to propose for our operations - active imediately - is this: > > - all customers requesting additional /25 (variable) shall have IPv6 > assigned and asked for trying it (if not already done before) > - all customers requesting additional /24 (variable) must already > have active v6 services running (eg. NS/MX/web site for the > beginning) This is a really good idea, on our network for each customers we have configured IPv6 and try to help them to use it. Our last procedure says to add firewall rules in both v4 and v6 when they ask using the last 2 bytes of the v4 address to map to their v6 address -- Geoffroy Rivat

1 0

Agenda for IPv6-wg @ RIPE 60 (v1)
by Shane Kerr 28 Apr '10

28 Apr '10

Hello, The IPv6 working group is scheduled for the same time at RIPE 60 in Prague as it was in RIPE 59 - immediately following the plenary on Tuesday. Here is a proposed agenda: A. Administrative stuff - Introduction - New charter - New chairs - Agenda bashing B. Javascript-based HTTP client measurements by Emile Aben C. IETF v6ops activity by Kurt Lindqvist D. CPE Overview by Marco Hogewoning E. IPv6 global policy review by Filiz Yilmaz F. IPv6-wg brainstorming . . . Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan Z. AOB & wrap-up The "brainstorming" session is an attempt to have some discussion about concrete ideas that we can use to reach the goals of the new charter. Marco will lead the session, but hopefully everyone will come with new ideas ready and join in. -- Shane

4 4

IPv6 client loss measurements, now on the web
by Tore Anderson 28 Apr '10

28 Apr '10

Hi list, I've finally gotten around to creating a web page dedicated to the measurements I've posted about here earlier. You'll find it at <http://fud.no/ipv6/>. It will be automatically updated every night, and it even has graphs. I think it'll be a much better home for the information than an IPv6 mailing list archive, so this means I won't be posting monthly reports any longer. Feel free to have a look! Any feedback is of course very welcome. Best regards, -- Tore Anderson Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ Tel: +47 21 54 41 27

1 0

Agenda for IPv6-wg @ RIPE 60 (v2)
by Shane Kerr 27 Apr '10

27 Apr '10

All, An updated version of the agenda. ------------------------------------------------------------------- The IPv6 working group is scheduled for the same time at RIPE 60 in Prague as it was in RIPE 59 - immediately following the plenary on Tuesday. Here is a proposed agenda: A. Administrative stuff - Introduction - New charter - New chairs - Agenda bashing B. IPv6 at Web Clients and Caching Resolvers by Emile Aben, RIPE NCC C. IETF v6ops activity by Kurt Lindqvist, Netnod D. CPE Overview by Marco Hogewoning, XS4ALL E. IPv6 WorldWide Policy Review by Filiz Yilmaz, RIPE NCC F. Mobile broadband and IPv6 in Slovenia by Jan Zorz, go6.si G. Update on Recent RIPE NCC IPv6 Activity by Christ Buckridge, RIPE NCC H. IPv6-wg brainstorming . . . Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan Z. AOB & wrap-up The "brainstorming" session is an attempt to have some discussion about concrete ideas that we can use to reach the goals of the new charter. Marco will lead the session, but hopefully everyone will come with new ideas ready and join in. -- Shane

1 0

Major additions to Team Cymru's Bogon Feed - includes IPv6 prefixes
by Steve Santorelli 19 Apr '10

19 Apr '10

Team Cymru is pleased to announce a significant addition to our bogon reference project which might be of interest to this list as it relates to IPv6 matters. The new portions of the project are offered at no cost to the community, and the original bogon lists and feeds are not being changed or canceled, just augmented. The new "fullbogon" feed includes prefixes allocated to RIRs, but not assigned by the RIRs to end-users, ISPs, etc, providing a more complete view of the unassigned space that should not be seen on the Internet. This new service is therefore more granular than the original feed, including a wide variety of non-routable prefixes as well as unassigned prefixes and it also includes IPv6 prefixes. Simply email bogonrs(a)cymru.com with your ASN, peering IP addresses and whether you use MD5 authentication. See an overview in the 46th episode of Team Cymru's 'The Who and Why Show' at www.youtube.com/teamcymru, as well as a more basic overview in episode 12. For a more detailed explanation, see <http://www.team-cymru.org/Services/Bogons/>. Even more so than the original feed, there are significant changes to the list every day and the feed automatically recalculates the prefixes as they are allocated from the regional registries, so make sure you are able to regularly update your lists. Internet security is all about "the other guy." If one sizeable network is insecure, it WILL be used to abuse other networks. We look forward to continuing to help our community to secure the edge. Why is this important? Bogons are defined as Martians (private and reserved addresses defined by RFC 1918 and RFC 5735) and netblocks that have not been allocated to a regional internet registry (RIR) by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. A bogon prefix is a route that should never appear in the Internet routing table on a Router. A packet routed over the public Internet (obviously, not including over VPNs or other tunnels) should never have a source address in a bogon range. These are commonly found as the source addresses of DDoS attacks and our research has previously shown that, in some cases, up to 60% of DDoS packets were obvious bogons (e.g. 127.1.2.3, 0.5.4.3, etc.). This new service comprises a larger set which also includes IP space that has been allocated to an RIR, but not by that RIR to an actual ISP or other end-user. While not all DDoS attacks use bogons, every little bit helps. Note additionally that bogon filtering is a component of anti-spoofing filtering, which is also very important. Internet security is all about "the other guy." If one sizeable network is insecure, it WILL be used to abuse other networks. We look forward to continuing to help our community to secure the edge. warm regards, Steve. -- Steve Santorelli,Team Cymru, Inc.|www.team-cymru.org steve(a)cymru.com|[moderated] Also, please note that there are many way to keep up with what Team Cymru are doing, see the lower part of: http://www.team-cymru.org/About/contact.html plus: * join our announce list via cymru-announce-subscribe(a)cymru.com * see what we see, www.team-cymru.org/Monitoring/Graphs * probably the best news feed in the world, www.team-cymru.org/News * cool stuff you can use, www.team-cymru.org/Services/ * see our Twitter feed at http://twitter.com/teamcymru

1 0