- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

IPv6 WG Agenda for RIPE75
by Jen Linkova 11 Sep '17

11 Sep '17

Hello, The agenda for the IPv6 WG session has been finalized and should be published soon. This time we have just one slot: A. Administrative matters [5 min] B. Geoff Huston, "Surviving IPv6 Fragmentation" [35 min] C. Wolfgang Zenker, "Webhosting on IPv6-only virtual machines - operational observations" [15 min] D. Benedikt Stockebrand, Wilhelm Boeddinghaus "IPv6 in Enterprise Network: Advanced Topics" [45 min] E. Lightning Talks [30 mins] F. IPv6 WG Chair Re-Election [10 mins] -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry on behalf of IPv6 WG chairs.

1 0

Re: [ipv6-wg] [ipv6-wg-chair] IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP
by Jetten Raymond 05 Sep '17

05 Sep '17

Dear IPv6 Working Group, I strongly believe we have consensus on version 7 of the "IPv6 prefix delegation BCOP" document. There is also consensus on this in the BCOP WG. We will now ask the NCC Comms team kindly to make this an official RIPE document. We apologize for delaying this. On behalf of Jen & Benedikt and ofcourse myself Ray, ************************************************************ Raymond Jetten Phone: +358 3 41024 139 Senior Network Specialist Fax: +358 3 41024 199 Elisa Oyj - IP/MPLS implementation O&M Mobile: +358 45 6700 139 Hermiankatu 3A raymond.jetten(a)elisa.fi FIN-33720, TAMPERE http://www.elisa.fi ************************************************************

2 1

New on RIPE Labs: Dealing with IPv6 Fragmentation in the DNS by Geoff Huston
by Mirjam Kuehne 30 Aug '17

30 Aug '17

Dear colleagues, Please find this new article by Geoff Huston on RIPE Labs: Dealing with IPv6 Fragmentation in the DNS https://labs.ripe.net/Members/gih/dealing-with-ipv6-fragmentation-in-the-dns Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC

1 1

Join RIPE NCC Hackathon Version 6, 4-5. November, Copenhagen, Denmark
by Vesna Manojlovic 28 Aug '17

28 Aug '17

Dear colleagues, The sixth RIPE NCC hackathon will take place on Saturday and Sunday, 4-5 November 2017 in Copenhagen, Denmark. The topic is: IPv6! We're looking for creative thinkers: front-end developers, UI designers, network operators, researchers, hackers and other enthusiastic coders, to help us develop new tools that would enable deployment of IPv6 and visualizations based on IPv6 measurements data. All source code developed during the hackathon will be publicly licensed and available on GitHub, and will be free for the entire community to use. -------------------- How to Apply -------------------- Interested? Learn more and apply online today! https://atlas.ripe.net/hackathon/version6/#!application-form *The application deadline is 9.9.* (9th September) We look forward to seeing you there! Find out more in this RIPE Labs article: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/becha/join-the-ripe-ncc-hackathon-version-6 Regards, Vesna Manojlovic Community Builder RIPE NCC

1 1

New on RIPE Labs: Echoes
by Mirjam Kuehne 25 Aug '17

25 Aug '17

Dear colleagues, Read on RIPE Labs how the NAT64 checker helped us to discover a fun network bug on our web front-end: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/stephen_strowes/echoes Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: Introducing NAT64 Checker
by Mirjam Kuehne 22 Aug '17

22 Aug '17

Dear colleagues, Please check out the NAT64 checker developed by Jan Zorz and Sander Steffann. It is now described on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/JanZorz/introducing-nat64-checker Kind regards, Mirjam Kuhne RIPE NCC

1 0

Version 6 of IPv6 prefix delegations BCOP is out
by Jan Zorz - Go6 15 Aug '17

15 Aug '17

Dear RIPE IPv6 WG, We received offline some good and valuable comments from MarcoH, addressed them and issued the version 6 of the document draft. https://sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v6.pdf Please, read and comment, if you think that we need to carry on with editing this document. If not, I would like to see if we can reach a consensus to move forward and ask RIPE staff to do the language check and publish this document as RIPE BCP. Any comments? Suggestions? For v6_pd_BCOP co-authors team, Jan Žorž

4 6

RIPE75 DCTM requirements ( small changes )
by Jetten Raymond 15 Aug '17

15 Aug '17

Hello IPv6 Working group! > ** NOTE FOR SPEAKERS[1] ** > > After Dubai had already been chosen as the location for the upcoming RIPE meeting, the authorities there (DTCM) have started to enforce some rules for conferences and speakers. All speakers (including remote speakers) will need to email the following information to meeting(a)ripe.net<mailto:meeting@ripe.net> before 15 September 2017): > > - Full name, title > - A colour copy of their passport > - A copy of their Emirates ID (if a UAE resident) > - Profile/bio for the speaker (at least 200 characters) > - Mobile number > - Email address > > This information will then be forwarded to the DTCM by the RIPE NCC. > > We realise that these requirements go beyond what was expected at previous meetings and that they may be a cause for concern for some people - especially the sharing of colour copies of passports. Unfortunately there is nothing we can do about this - we have to comply with local laws. If you do not wish to comply with these requirements then you will not be allowed to present on stage. You will still be able to join the discussions from the floor. > > [1] "Speakers" includes anyone who is presenting on stage - presenters, WG Chairs, and community members who are chairing or moderating sessions. This also includes policy proposers who are planning to present their policy. Attendees speaking at the microphones during the Q&A are explicitly not considered as speakers. The RIPE NCC has negotiated with the authorities in Dubai, and has some good news for us. It is now confirmed that a photocopy of speakers' passports is *not* required. Residents of the UAE are still required to upload a copy of their Emirates ID (in jpeg format). The information on https://ripe75.ripe.net/attend/dtcm-requirements/ has been updated. All attendees, and especially speakers, should take a look at that page to avoid surprises. Speakers will be asked to upload the above data via a secure webform provided by the RIPE NCC, who will then pass it on to the DTCM. The data will be permanently deleted from the RIPE NCC infrastructure one week after the RIPE 75 Meeting. Rgds, Ray, IPv6 working group Co-Chair

1 0

Same procedure as every year: Chair (Re-)election
by Benedikt Stockebrand 15 Aug '17

15 Aug '17

Hi IPv6 working group, looks like it's time we did a bit of paperwork... According to the "IPv6 WG Chair Selection Process"[1] it is time for one of us chairs to step down and possibly stand again for re-election. Jen and I fought it out (and what you'd expect, I lost:-) and it was decided that I'll step down---to stand for re-election---effective the next WG meeting in Dubai. With the way things have worked out, I'd be more than happy to serve another term as a WG chair. Cheers, Benedikt [1] https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/ipv6/ipv6-wg-chair-selection-proce… -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/

3 2

IPv6 Prefix delegation BCOP version 3 is out...
by Jan Zorz - Go6 28 Jul '17

28 Jul '17

Dear RIPE IPv6 WG, After presentation at RIPE74 BCOP TF and IPv6 WG sessions we got some feedback from community over mailing list and while on stage and we addressed those comments as far as we could, resulting in version 3 of the IPv6 prefix delegations draft. To avoid sending around emails with attachment I'm providing the link where you can access the PDF file: https://www.sinog.si/docs/draft-IPv6pd-BCOP-v3.pdf I have a feeling that after all this cycles and comments from the community - we are reaching the point when we'll have to consider calling a consensus if possible, make it a stable RIPE BCOP document and give it a number. Please, read the latest version and see if you can agree with the current text and express your support (if agree) on this mailing list, so chairs can judge if there is enough consensus on the text to maybe go into a WG last call (or maybe even skip that if clear consensus, this is not PDP process ;) ) Cheers and thnx, Jan (on behalf of the co-authors of the document)

11 24