- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

"Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" comment
by Nash, Steve 18 Jan '11

18 Jan '11

Regarding: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-501.html I find no mention of flow instrumentation in the November 2010 document. I suggest that "router and layer 3 switch" Mandatory support should include maintenance and export of flow records , ideally compliant with rfc 3917, with sampling rate capability of at least 1 per 1000 packets, at the maximum packet rate of the device. Regards Steve Nash ________________________ Steve Nash CEng MIET Consulting Engineer Arbor Networks office +44 118 967 4917 mobile +44 772 029 1359 www.arbornetworks.com<http://www.arbornetworks.com/> How networks grow(tm) ________________________

13 31

[annoucement] changing jobs
by Marco Hogewoning 09 Jan '11

09 Jan '11

Hi All, As some of you may already know, I will be changing jobs. As of January 1st, I will join the RIPE NCC training department. This of course raises the question wether I should stay as co-chair of this working group. After talking with various people, including the NCC management, the RIPE chair and the other WG co-chairs, we concluded that I can stay on as a co-chair. However as the NCC has to remain neutral I will pull out of any discussions regarding address policy or other proposals directly related to the operations of the RIPE NCC. I will leave decisions regarding these proposals up to David and Shane, the other two co-chairs of this working group. If you have any questions or objections to this situation, please post to the IPv6 WG list or to me directly. I would like to thank my former employer, XS4ALL Internet, for the time and money they allowed me to spent on this working group over the past years. Happy new year and hope to see you in 2011, Marco Hogewoning IPv6 working group co-chair

9 8

RE: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 is going to Last Call
by kpn-ip-office＠kpn.com 07 Jan '11

07 Jan '11

I support the proposal. With kind regards, ir. A.W. (Andries) Hettema KPN OZM KS&O B&I Internet +31 70 34 38290 andries.hettema(a)kpn.com -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: address-policy-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] Namens Shane Kerr Verzonden: donderdag 6 januari 2011 14:20 Aan: db-wg(a)ripe.net; 'address-policy-wg(a)ripe.net' Onderwerp: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 is going to Last Call Hello, [ Courtesy copy sent to address policy and database working groups. Please follow up on the ipv6-wg list. ] The Review Phase for the RIPE policy proposal 2010-06 ended on 2010-12-27 (Monday, 27 December 2010). You can see the policy proposal here: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-06.html There were some clarifications during the Review Phase, but nothing indicating changes needed. David and I have decided that the proposal is ready for a Last Call. (As co-author of the proposal, Marco has recused himself from any consensus judgments.) The last call period is four weeks, so will end 2010-02-03 (Thursday, 3 February 2011). Please e-mail any final comments to ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net before then. Thanks, -- Shane

1 0

AUTO: Nicht erreichbar bis 11.1.2011 / Out of Office until 11.1.2011
by Joachim Strohbach 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

Ich bin abwesend und kehre am 12.01.2011 zurück. Danke für Ihre E-Mail-Nachricht. Ich bin bis 11. Januar 2011 nicht im Büro. In dringenden Angelegenheiten kontaktieren Sie bitte DENIC IT-Services (E-Mail: its(a)denic.de, Tel: (069) 27235-160 oder -250). ----- Thank you for your email message. I am not in the office until 11 January 2011. In urgent cases please contact DENIC IT-Services (e-mail: its(a)denic.de, Tel: +49 69 27235-160 or -250). -- Joachim Strohbach Leiter IT-Services / Head of IT-Services DENIC eG Kaiserstraße 75-77 60329 Frankfurt am Main GERMANY E-Mail: strohbach(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235-123 Fon: +49 69 27235-160 (Assistance) Fon: +49 69 27235-250 (IT-Services) Fax: +49 69 27235-239 SIP-URI: sip:123@denic.de http://www.denic.de PGP-KeyID: 0x7A8A00FF, Fingerprint: 30AB 0F15 17D3 995F CA50 F0A8 EA30 B915 7A8A 00FF Angaben nach § 25a Absatz 1 GenG: DENIC Domain Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft eG (Sitz: Frankfurt am Main) Vorstand: Sabine Dolderer, Helga Krüger, Carsten Schiefner, Dr. Jörg Schweiger Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Elmar Knipp Eingetragen unter Nr. 770 im Genossenschaftsregister, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main Hinweis: Dies ist eine automatische Antwort auf Ihre Nachricht "[db-wg] 2010-06 is going to Last Call" gesendet am 6.1.11 14:20:25. Diese ist die einzige Benachrichtigung, die Sie empfangen werden, während diese Person abwesend ist.

1 0

2010-06 is going to Last Call
by Shane Kerr 06 Jan '11

06 Jan '11

Hello, The Review Phase for the RIPE policy proposal 2010-06 ended on 2010-12-27 (Monday, 27 December 2010). You can see the policy proposal here: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-06.html There were some clarifications during the Review Phase, but nothing indicating changes needed. David and I have decided that the proposal is ready for a Last Call. (As co-author of the proposal, Marco has recused himself from any consensus judgments.) The last call period is four weeks, so will end 2010-02-03 (Thursday, 3 February 2011). Please e-mail any final comments to ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net before then. Thanks, -- Shane

1 0

2010 IPv4 (and IPv6) Address Use Report
by Iljitsch van Beijnum 04 Jan '11

04 Jan '11

[ (Non-cross)posted to NANOG, PPML, RIPE IPv6 wg, Dutch IPv6 TF. ] On the web: IPv4: http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace2010.php IPv6: http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace-ipv6-2010.php The IPv4 one is included below: 2010 IPv4 Address Use Report As of January 1, 2011, the number of unused IPv4 addresses is 495.66 million. Exactly a year earlier, the number of available addresses was 721.06 million. So we collectively used up 225.4 million addresses in 2010. 35 of the 256 the /8s that make up the IPv4 address space have the status "reserved". 0 and 127 have special meaning and can't be used for normal purposes. 224 - 239 are used for multicast and 240 - 255 are "reserved for future use". With only about two years worth of IPv4 addresses remaining on the shelves, it would seem that that future is here now, but unfortunately, pretty much all operating systems balk at using a "reserved" address. So unreserving those addresses means upgrading EVERY system connected to the Internet. If we're going to do that, we may as well skip those reserved IPv4 addresses and upgrade to IPv6. Last but not least, there's block 10, which is the largest of the three address blocks set aside for private use. The others, 172.16.0.0/12 and 192.168.0.0/16, don't show up as reserved, but are obviously not available for regular use. This makes the total number of usable IPv4 addresses is (256 - 35) * 2^24 - 2^20 - 2^16 = 3706.65 million addresses. The "IANA global pool" consists of 7 /8s (117.44 million) are still unused (unallocated): 39/8, 102/8, 103/8, 104/8, 106/8, 179/8 and 185/8. But there's also a lot of unused space hiding in the "allocated" and "legacy" categories. Each RIR publishes a list of address blocks further delegated to ISPs or end users every day on their FTP servers. If we add up all those blocks, this comes out to 3210.99 million addresses. So the total number of usable-but-unused IPv4 addresses is 3706.65 - 3210.99 = 495.66 million. Going back to the IANA global pool, these are the changes over the past year: Delegated Blocks +/- 2010 to/status AfriNIC 3 +1 APNIC 42 +8 ARIN 35 +4 LACNIC 8 +2 RIPE NCC 34 +4 LEGACY 92 UNALLOCATED 7 -19 There is an agreement between IANA and the RIRs that each RIR will get one of the last five /8s. APNIC has been getting two /8s every three months like clockwork in 2010. If this continues, they'll be getting numbers 7 and 6 later this month, and then the final distribution will look like this: Delegated Blocks +/- 2010 to/status AfriNIC 4 APNIC 45 ARIN 36 LACNIC 9 RIPE NCC 35 LEGACY 92 UNALLOCATED - At this point, it becomes very interesting what the status of the legacy space is, exactly. The legacy blocks are each "administered" by one of the RIRs, but does that mean that that RIR is free to further delegate that space to ISPs and end users? There are 146.92 million unused addresses in legacy space, including 16.65 million returned by Interop a few months ago. This is the used versus unused address space administered by each RIR: Legacy Allocated total unused total unused AfriNIC 33.55 24.85 50.33 27.06 APNIC 100.66 22.32 704.64 44.38 ARIN 654.31 60.55 587.20 56.21 LACNIC - - 134.22 37.39 RIPE NCC 67.11 5.77 570.43 67.38 IANA 671.09 16.65 - - AfriNIC used up 8.95 million addresses last year. So their current unused allocated space is good for another three years (if nothing changes) and their final /8 is worth another almost two years. If they get to use their legacy space, that buys them another 2.5 years. So unless IPv4 address use <em>really</em> takes off in Africa, AfriNIC will be handing out addresses for at least three or four years. APNIC is at the opposite end of the spectrum, using up no less than 126.22 million new IPv4 addresses last year. Even if they get to use the legacy space they administer on top of three of the last seven /8s and, it's hard to see how APNIC can avoid having to tell people "no" before the year is out. However, there is a caveat: in the 2010 APNIC records, there is 6.65 million addresses worth of space that isn't in the 2011 records. Part of this is address space returned to APNIC. In other cases, an address block delegated in a previous year expands or shrinks retroactively. Depending on what the underlying reason for these changes is, the actual rate at which APNIC and the other RIRs are giving out address space may be different from what it seems to be at first glance. ARIN, LACNIC, and the RIPE NCC used up 54.55, 17.29, and 75.45 million addresses, respectively, in 2010. However, ARIN saw 27.24 million addresses returned, including the 16.65 million from Interop, which is administered in the ARIN records even though the IANA list doesn't reflect this. For AfriNIC, LACNIC and the RIPE NCC the numbers of addresses that came back were 0.31, 0.22, and 22.62 million, respectively. With respect to running out of addresses, it's important to realize that the Pareto principle (the 80/20 rule) applies: out of the 7686 address blocks given out last year, only 392 (5 percent) were blocks larger than 100,000 addresses, but those were responsible for 82 percent of the address <em>space</em> given out. Even when the RIRs are no longer able to give out those large blocks, they may still be able to fulfill the requests for address blocks smaller than 10,000 addresses. Last year, 6425 such blocks were given out, totaling 14.03 million addresses. It really only takes a single address to be in the content business; it's the ISPs that need a continuous supply of new addresses to connect new customers. So the address shortages looming beyond the summer will hit ISPs and their broadband/mobile customers first and foremost, and the content industry to a much lesser degree. The top 15 IPv4 address holding countries: 2011-01-01 2010-01-01 Increase Country 1 - US 1519.53 M 1495.13 M 1.6% United States 2 - CN 277.64 M 232.45 M 19.4% China 3 - JP 186.82 M 177.15 M 5.5% Japan 4 - EU 151.80 M 149.48 M 1.6% Multi-country in Europe 5 (6) KR 103.50 M 77.77 M 33.1% Korea 6 (5) DE 91.61 M 86.51 M 5.9% Germany 7 (9) GB 82.25 M 74.18 M 10.9% United Kingdom 8 - CA 79.53 M 76.96 M 3.3% Canada 9 - FR 79.29 M 75.54 M 5.0% France 10 - AU 49.10 M 39.77 M 23.5% Australia 11 - BR 40.24 M 33.95 M 18.5% Brazil 12 - IT 37.14 M 33.50 M 10.9% Italy 13 - RU 34.66 M 28.47 M 21.7% Russia 14 - TW 31.93 M 27.10 M 17.8% Taiwan 15 (19) IN 28.70 M 19.42 M 47.8% India Because the US holds so much space, the increase of 25 million addresses seems small, but that's still more than 10% of the address space given out in 2010. China's growth is slowing down a little at 45 million addresses last year compared to 50 million in 2009. But other countries in Asia are picking up the slack and then some: Korea keeps using up large amounts of address space, and India is now also picking up the pace. The US now has 47.3% of the address space in use, down from 50.1% a year ago. The other countries in the top 15 collectively hold 39.7%, up from 38%. That leaves 13% for the rest of the world, up from 12%. Note that I slightly changed the way addresses are counted: previously, all the legacy blocks that didn't have an RIR listed were assumed to be used 100%. But with the return of most of the Interop block this is no longer the case: although ARIN isn't listed as administering the 45/8 block, they actually are and only have 45.0.0.0/15 listed as in use.

1 0

RIPE-501bis
by Patrik Fältström 03 Jan '11

03 Jan '11

Hi, I hear that there are some discussions about a new version of RIPE 501 in other forums than this mailing list for this wg. More precisely in some LinkedIn Forum. Let me in a few words say that side discussions makes me somewhat nervous. This document do have a large impact on the market and although of course its existence should be announced widely, I do not want to see actual discussions that lead to new versions anywhere else than here on this mailing list. If for example editors do get feedback privately or elsewhere than here on the list, I expect I will see at least summaries of that discussion here. We at Cisco have read RIPE-501 in detail, we have compared the document with other similar requirements documents, and yes, we will come shortly with some suggestions for changes. Both based on our experience with other such documents (it would be good if they are somewhat similar), and feedback we already have got from customers of ours that tries to use RIPE-501. I.e. pure editorial changes on how the document is composed. Patrik Fältström

2 1

IPv6 address representation RFC
by Seiichi Kawamura 20 Dec '10

20 Dec '10

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi My first time posting to this list... A discussion came up on the IETF v6ops list and I was suggested that I should do an FYI post to this list about RFC5952. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5952 The RFC defines a canonical IPv6 representation format. It also describes problems that happen without canonical representation. If you are just starting to deploy IPv6, this maybe of some help in avoiding problems. Many implementations have been fixed since the RFC was published, and I hope future implementations will follow this RFC as well. Log parsing and grepping can get very painful without this... Tools are also available to help with correct representation. http://intermapper.com/ipv6validator http://www.deepspace6.net/projects/ipv6calc.html http://hackage.haskell.org/package/ip6addr http://tools.bgp4.jp/IPv6canonical/IPv6canonical.txt I hope this will be of some help to the operators on this list. Regards, Seiichi -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAk0PASMACgkQcrhTYfxyMkL0iwCfYn7mCb6qilrXY0mlf6zr3M3W DhMAn0IAvLdZ2HFaFPiFdK7Y9AGvmFdC =Qqhf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
by Emilio Madaio 14 Dec '10

14 Dec '10

Dear Colleagues, The IPv6 WG Chairs have decided that the proposal 2010-06 is ready for a 2 week Review Phase. Marco Hogewoning did not participate to the decision as he is a co-proposer. Following the feedback received, the draft documents for this proposal have been published. The impact analysis that was conducted for this proposal has also been published. You can find the full proposal at: http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-06.html and the draft documents at: http://ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-481-draft2010-06.html http://ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ripe-new-draft2010-06.html We encourage you to read the draft document text and send any comments to ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net before 27 December 2010. Regards Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC

5 4

Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
by James Blessing 13 Dec '10

13 Dec '10

On 13 December 2010 14:44, Emilio Madaio <emadaio(a)ripe.net> wrote: > http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-06.html Two questions Is 'assignment-size' going to be limited to a number in the db? Could I put a 'stupid' number in? J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476

1 0

The trouble with 6to4
by Mirjam Kuehne 06 Dec '10

06 Dec '10

Dear colleagues, We (thanks to Emile Aben) measured how broken 6to4 really is and found that it is pretty bad! Read more on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/6to4-how-bad-is-it-really Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

New document available: RIPE-501 Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by Marco Hogewoning 25 Nov '10

25 Nov '10

Dear community, A new ripe document, RIPE-501, has been published "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment". This document aims to be a guide of what to ask for exactly when IPv6 is a requirement in a tender or some contract and lists the various applicable RFCs for specific kinds of ICT equipment. The document is available on http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-501.html Please note that when using this document as a reference, as with any RIPE document, it might get superseded by new versions in the future. Many thanks to the authors and everybody who helped with proof reading, translation and feedback. Marco, David & Shane, co-chairs of the IPv6 working group

2 1

AUTO: Nicht erreichbar bis 29.11.2010 / Out of Office until 29.11.2010
by Joachim Strohbach 25 Nov '10

25 Nov '10

Ich bin abwesend und kehre am 29.11.2010 zurück. Danke für Ihre E-Mail-Nachricht. Ich bin bis 29. November 2010 nicht im Büro. In dringenden Angelegenheiten kontaktieren Sie bitte DENIC IT-Services (E-Mail: its(a)denic.de, Tel: (069) 27235-160 oder -250). ----- Thank you for your email message. I am not in the office until 29 November 2010. In urgent cases please contact DENIC IT-Services (e-mail: its(a)denic.de, Tel: +49 69 27235-160 or -250). -- Joachim Strohbach Leiter IT-Services / Head of IT-Services DENIC eG Kaiserstraße 75-77 60329 Frankfurt am Main GERMANY E-Mail: strohbach(a)denic.de Fon: +49 69 27235-123 Fon: +49 69 27235-160 (Assistance) Fon: +49 69 27235-250 (IT-Services) Fax: +49 69 27235-239 SIP-URI: sip:123@denic.de http://www.denic.de PGP-KeyID: 0x7A8A00FF, Fingerprint: 30AB 0F15 17D3 995F CA50 F0A8 EA30 B915 7A8A 00FF Angaben nach § 25a Absatz 1 GenG: DENIC Domain Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft eG (Sitz: Frankfurt am Main) Vorstand: Sabine Dolderer, Helga Krüger, Carsten Schiefner, Dr. Jörg Schweiger Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Elmar Knipp Eingetragen unter Nr. 770 im Genossenschaftsregister, Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main Hinweis: Dies ist eine automatische Antwort auf Ihre Nachricht "New document available: RIPE-501 Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" gesendet am 24.11.10 20:48:45. Diese ist die einzige Benachrichtigung, die Sie empfangen werden, während diese Person abwesend ist.

1 0

Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by David Kessens 24 Nov '10

24 Nov '10

Working Group, The "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" draft seems to have reached a level of maturity that is enough to issue a formal Last Call to determine whether it is ready for publication as a RIPE document. The latest version is available here: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ipv6-ict-requirements.html We would appreciate if you let us know by the end of November 17, 2010 if you have read the document and whether you support the publication of the document. As long as we get at least 8 statements of support and no significant issues are raised, we will ask the RIPE NCC to publish the document after fixing minor editorial issues (if found). David, Marco & Shane ---

11 30

Re: [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by Marco Hogewoning 23 Nov '10

23 Nov '10

Please for the process, as this is a last call, be very clear wether you are making comments about future versions or if you are objecting against publication of the current document. So far I consider this future improvements and we will go forward with publishing the current text as final. If anybody objects, please state this clearly and we will back out. The authors already agreed to do a second version together with some help from others, at the same time we have stakeholders who would like to get this draft label removed. Groet, MarcoH ----- Reply message ----- From: "Isacco Fontana" <isacco.fontana(a)trentinonetwork.it> Date: Tue, Nov 23, 2010 18:18 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment To: <mtinka(a)globaltransit.net> Cc: <ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net>, "Ivan Pepelnjak" <ipepelnjak(a)gmail.com>

2 1

Re: [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by Ivan Pepelnjak 23 Nov '10

23 Nov '10

Dear all, As I'm one of the original authors of this document (now nicely hidden behind the "Slovenian IPv6 working group" blob ;) and had a bit to do with MPLS in the past, please allow me to comment on the MPLS-related requirements. 6PE/6VPE ========= Unfortunately, the only way to combine IPv6 with MPLS features like MPLS-TE or FRR today (and in the next few years) is to run IPv4 MPLS core and 6PE/6VPE. The requirement to support 6PE/6VPE is thus MANDATORY, but has to be conditioned the same way mobile IPv6 is. I would therefore suggest that we add the following two bullets to the "Mandatory support" part of the "Router or Layer 3 switch" equipment: * If MPLS functionality (for example, BGP-free core, MPLS TE, MPLS FRR) is requested, the PE-routers and route reflectors MUST support "Connecting IPv6 Islands over IPv4 MPLS Using IPv6 Provider Edge Routers (6PE)" [RFC 4798] * If layer-3 VPN functionality is requested, the PE-routers and route reflectors MUST support "BGP-MPLS IP Virtual Private Network (VPN) Extension for IPv6 VPN" [RFC 4659] MT IS-IS & MPLS =============== There's another gotcha that we totally missed: MT for IS-IS (RFC 5120) should be mentioned and it should be MANDATORY in combination with MPLS (otherwise you might experience some weird symptoms if you decide to run some IPv6 natively). The "Router or Layer 3 switch" equipment section thus needs two more items: MANDATORY --------- * If MPLS Traffic Engineering is used in combination with IS-IS routing protocol, the equipment MUST support "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] OPTIONAL -------- * When IS-IS routing protocol is requested, the equipment SHOULD support "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] (this support is highly recommended) Best, Ivan Pepelnjak www.ioshints.info

4 4

New draft document available: Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by Marco Hogewoning 17 Nov '10

17 Nov '10

(apologies for any duplicate emails) Dear Colleagues, Jan Zorz and Sander Steffan have prepared a document to serve as a guide what the requirements should be when asking for IPv6 in a tender or contract. It is our intention to publish this document as a RIPE document BCP so people can use this as an external reference. The draft version of this document is available at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ipv6-ict-requirements.html Your comments and feedback can be sent to the IPv6 working group mailing-list on ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net. Regards, Marco Hogewoning IPv6 WG co-chair

7 17

Interactive Graph on RIPE Labs: Networks with IPv6 over Time
by Mirjam Kuehne 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

Dear colleagues, On RIPE Labs you can now find an interactive graph (provided by Emile Aben) that shows the percentage of networks (ASes) that announce one or more IPv6 prefixes in the global routing table. You can specify countries and compare the IPv6 deployment by region: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/interesting-graph-networks-with-ipv… Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

5 6

Announcement: RIPE NCC Training Courses
by Training Mailbox 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

[Apologies for duplicate e-mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC invites you to register for one of our upcoming training courses: - The LIR Training Course This course teaches LIRs how to request Internet number resources and interact with the RIPE NCC. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/lir/outline.html - The Routing Registry Training Course This course teaches LIRs how to use the RIPE Database for routing. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/rr/outline.html - The IPv6 Training Course This course teaches LIRs about the need for IPv6 and includes basic information on how to plan your deployment. A course outline is available at: http://www.ripe.net/training/ipv6/outline.html To see the location of upcoming courses and to register, please use the LIR Portal or complete the registration form on our website at: RIPE NCC Upcoming Courses List & Registration https://lirportal.ripe.net/lirportal/training/course-list.html If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at <training(a)ripe.net>. Kind regards, Rumy Kanis Training Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

Draft agenda RIPE-61: Tuesday November 16th 16:00 - 18:00 CET
by Marco Hogewoning 16 Nov '10

16 Nov '10

Hello, Sorry for beng a bit late. This is the draft agenda for the IPv6 WG sesison in Rome. We have a pretty full programme with lots of interesting examples of what happens when you deploy IPv6 in the real world. 1 opening/administrativa 2 "Experiences from an IPv6-only world" - Jari Arkko/Ari Keranen 3 "Detecting (and fixing!), IPv6 dualstack brokenness" - Tore Aderson 4 "The results on introducing native IPv6 at XS4ALL - Marco Hogewoning 5 "RIPE NCC stats" - Emile Aben 6 "Native IPv6 via xDSL - How to tweak your LNS" - Emanuel Kleindienst 7 "Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment" - Jan Zorz/Sander Steffan 8 "Update on policy proposal 2010-06" - Marco Hogewoning/Remco van Mook See you all in Rome and for those of you who can't make it, this session will be live broadcasted. See http://ripe61.ripe.net/programme/remote-participation/ for more information. On behalf of the IPv6 WG chairs, Marco Hogewoning

2 2

Re: [ipv6-wg] Last Call (20101117): Requirements For IPv6 in ICT Equipment
by Ivan Pepelnjak 10 Nov '10

10 Nov '10

Dear all, As I'm one of the original authors of this document (now nicely hidden behind the "Slovenian IPv6 working group" blob ;) and had a bit to do with MPLS in the past, please allow me to comment on the MPLS-related requirements. 6PE/6VPE ========= Unfortunately, the only way to combine IPv6 with MPLS features like MPLS-TE or FRR today (and in the next few years) is to run IPv4 MPLS core and 6PE/6VPE. The requirement to support 6PE/6VPE is thus MANDATORY, but has to be conditioned the same way mobile IPv6 is. I would therefore suggest that we add the following two bullets to the "Mandatory support" part of the "Router or Layer 3 switch" equipment: * If MPLS functionality (for example, BGP-free core, MPLS TE, MPLS FRR) is requested, the PE-routers and route reflectors MUST support "Connecting IPv6 Islands over IPv4 MPLS Using IPv6 Provider Edge Routers (6PE)" [RFC 4798] * If layer-3 VPN functionality is requested, the PE-routers and route reflectors MUST support "BGP-MPLS IP Virtual Private Network (VPN) Extension for IPv6 VPN" [RFC 4659] MT IS-IS & MPLS =============== There's another gotcha that we totally missed: MT for IS-IS (RFC 5120) should be mentioned and it should be MANDATORY in combination with MPLS (otherwise you might experience some weird symptoms if you decide to run some IPv6 natively). The "Router or Layer 3 switch" equipment section thus needs two more items: MANDATORY --------- * If MPLS Traffic Engineering is used in combination with IS-IS routing protocol, the equipment MUST support "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] OPTIONAL -------- * When IS-IS routing protocol is requested, the equipment SHOULD support "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)" [RFC 5120] (this support is highly recommended) Best, Ivan Pepelnjak www.ioshints.info

1 0

IPv6 Crawler and Matrix now on RIPE Labs
by Mirjam Kuehne 20 Oct '10

20 Oct '10

Dear colleagues, The UK ISOC chapter together with the Nile University in Egypt have developed an IPv6 crawler and matrix. You can now find the description including a pointer to the tool and the maps showing the results on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-crawler-and-matrix Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE Labs

1 0

more on IPv6 CPEs
by João Damas 19 Oct '10

19 Oct '10

http://blog.comcast.com/2010/10/comcast-donates-additional-ipv6-open-source… Posted by Richard Woundy, SVP, Software and Applications, in Broadband "Comcast has now released additional free open source software that may help facilitate the industry's and end users' transition to IPv6. We are releasing home gateway device (a.k.a. home router) software, which is available here as open source, developed in conjunction with Xavient Information Systems. While it is very important that home gateway devices to support native IPv6, devices may still need to handle situations where tunnel-based IPv6 transition technology would be used. Thus, this software release supports cases where either IPv6 is tunneled over IPv4 using 6RD, or IPv4 is tunneled over IPv6 using Dual-Stack Lite. More information is available on the Comcast IPv6 Information Center."

2 1

New on RIPE Labs: Study on IPv6 Background Radiation
by Mirjam Kuehne 04 Oct '10

04 Oct '10

[apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, Geoff Huston has done an interesting study on "Background Radiation in IPv6". The results are published on RIPE Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/background-radiation-in-ipv6 Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

US government IPv6 mandate
by Shane Kerr 04 Oct '10

04 Oct '10

All, Old-ish news, but I only saw this just now: http://news.techworld.com/networking/3241574/obama-administration-issues-ip… I look forward to success stories of people trying to get US visas using IPv6. ;) -- Shane

2 1