- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

2006 IPv4 Address Use Report
by Iljitsch van Beijnum 01 Jan '07

01 Jan '07

2006 was another busy year for the five Regional Internet Registries: together, they gave out 161.48 million IPv4 addresses, just shy of the 165.45 million given out in 2005 as measured on january first 2006. The current (jan 1st, 2007) figure for 2005 is 175.52 million addresses. Together with adjustments for earlier years, this brings the total addresses available to almost exactly 1.3 billion, down from 1468.61 million a year ago. This is out of 3706.65 million usable IPv4 addresses, so 2407.11 million addresses are currently given out to either end-users or Internet Service Providers. Breakdown by Regional Internet Registry over the past few years as seen on 2007-01-01: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 AfriNIC 0.56 0.39 0.26 0.22 0.51 1.03 2.72 APNIC 20.94 28.83 27.03 33.05 42.89 53.86 51.78 ARIN 30.83 28.55 21.08 22.32 34.26 47.57 38.94 LACNIC 0.88 1.61 0.65 2.62 3.77 10.97 11.50 RIPE NCC 24.79 25.36 19.84 29.61 47.49 62.09 56.53 Total 78.00 84.73 68.87 87.82 128.92 175.52 161.48 Compare this to the totals as seen on 2006-01-01: Total 78.35 88.95 68.93 87.77 128.45 165.45 (See last year's report for more details at http://www.bgpexpert.com/ addrspace2005.php ) The main reason for the discrepancy is that the RIRs publish on their respective FTP servers lists of which address block was given out when. When a block of address space is given back by the holder, it's removed from the list. This is the reason why the numbers for earlier years keep going down. The 10 million extra addresses in 2005 and 4 million in 2001 are the responsibility of ARIN, which went from 36.30 million addresses for 2005 in their 2006-01-01 records to 47.56 in their 2007-01-01 records. The reason for the retroactive growth is unknown. AfriNIC gives out address space in Africa, APNIC in the Asia-Pacific region, ARIN in North America, LACNIC in Latin American and the Caribbean and the RIPE NCC in Europe, the former Soviet Union and the Middle East. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA, part of ICANN) keeps an overview of the IPv4 address space at http://www.iana.org/ assignments/ipv4-address-space. The list consists of 256 blocks of 16.78 million addresses. Breakdown: Delegated to Blocks +/- 2006 Addresses (millions) AfriNIC 1 16.78 APNIC 19 +3 318.77 ARIN 27 +4 452.98 LACNIC 4 67.11 RIPE NCC 22 +3 369.10 Various 50 838.86 End-user 43 721.42 Available 55 -10 922.74 Of the 2063.60 million addresses delegated to the five Regional Internet Registries, 1685.69 million have been delegated to end-users or ISPs by the RIRs, and 377.91 million are still available, which is almost identical to last year's 378.09 number. Along with the 922.74 million addresses still available in the IANA global pool this makes the total number of available addresses 1300.65 million, down 167.96 million from a year earlier. The size of address blocks given has been increasing steadily. The table below shows the number of requests for a certain range of block sizes (equal or higher than the first, lower than the second value). (2005 and earlier values from 2006-01-01 data, 2006 values from 2007-01-01 data.) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 < 1000 326 474 547 745 1022 1309 1526 1000 - 8000 652 1176 897 1009 1516 1891 2338 8000 - 64k 1440 868 822 1014 1100 1039 1133 64k - 500k 354 262 163 215 404 309 409 500k - 2M 19 39 29 46 61 60 56 > 2M 3 5 5 6 7 18 13 The number of blocks in the two smallest categories have increased rapidly, but not as fast as the number of blocks in the largest category, in relative numbers at least. However, the increase in large blocks has a very dramatic effect while the small blocks are insignificant, when looking at the millions of addresses involved: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 < 1000 0.10 0.16 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.44 0.52 1000 - 8000 2.42 4.47 3.23 3.45 4.49 5.07 6.10 8000 - 64k 18.79 12.81 11.35 14.00 15.99 15.46 17.17 64k - 500k 35.98 32.19 20.28 25.51 42.01 34.23 49.64 500k - 2M 12.68 24.64 21.30 31.98 44.63 41.63 46.64 > 2M 8.39 14.68 12.58 12.58 20.97 68.62 41.42 The increase in the 2M+ blocks was solely responsible for the high number of addresses given out in 2005. In 2006, there was growth in all categories except the 2M+ one (even the 500k - 2M category increased in number of addresses if not in number of blocks). When the 2M+ blocks are taken out of the equation, 2005 had a total of 96.83 million addresses (2006-01-01) and 2006 119.06 million given out. Another way to look at the same data: Year Blocks Addresses (M) Average block size 2000 2794 78.35 28043 2001 2824 88.95 31497 2002 2463 68.93 27985 2003 3035 87.77 28921 2004 4110 128.45 31252 2005 4626 165.45 35765 2006 5475 161.48 29494 The 2407.11 million addresses currently in use aren't very evenly distributed over the countries in the world. The current top 15 is: Country Addresses 2007-01-01 Addr 2006-01-01 US 1366.53 M 1324.93 M United States JP 151.27 M 143.00 M Japan EU 115.83 M 113.87 M Multi-country in Europe CN 98.02 M 74.39 M China GB 93.91 M 73.81 M United Kingdom CA 71.32 M 67.43 M Canada DE 61.59 M 51.13 M Germany FR 58.23 M 45.16 M France KR 51.13 M 41.91 M Korea AU 30.64 M 26.87 M Australia BR 19.27 M 17.17 M Brazil IT 19.14 M 18.39 M Italy ES 18.69 M 16.29 M Spain TW 18.16 M 16.28 M Taiwan NL 18.08 M 16.40 M Netherlands The US holds 57% (down from 60% a year ago) of the IPv4 address space in use. The other countries in the list together hold another 34% (up from 32%). The rest of the world has 9% (up from 8%). A copy of this information and a tool to perform queries on up to date data is available at http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace2006.php

1 0

New IPv6 block allocated to RIPE NCC
by leo vegoda 18 Oct '06

18 Oct '06

[Apologies for duplicate mails] Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2a00::/12 from the IANA in October 2006. This allocation expands two previous allocations. We will begin allocating from this new space in the near future. The minimum allocation size for this /12 has been set at /32. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC can be found on our web site at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

2001:502:d399::1
by Max Tulyev 10 Oct '06

10 Oct '06

Hi! Can anybody reach 2001:502:d399::1? It is the DNS server listed in the .org and some other TLDs. Now I'm getting ICMP6 host unreachable and DNS slows down slightly, -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO)

4 3

Comercial IPv6 availability in the Nordics
by Hans Petter Holen 04 Oct '06

04 Oct '06

This spring I renegotiated our corporate VPN and Internet agreements. In the request for interest/proposals I among other things asked for IPv6 availability. Since I the company I work for, Visma, has offices in Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland there was not that many ISPs to ask. >From the 4 that was able to offer service in all the Nordic countries only one of them answered Yes - but added "not for production - we do not offer any SLA on this service yet." -hph (and yes - I did choose the provider that said they could offer IPv6 - but for other reasons like price and SLA conditions)

2 1

Agenda for ipv6 wg RIPE53
by David Kessens 29 Sep '06

29 Sep '06

During the next RIPE meeting, our working group is scheduled to meet: Wed Oct 4, 17:00-18:00, Grand Ballroom, Krasnapolsky Hotel, Amsterdam Please see below for the agenda. I believe that we might still have a little bit of time left so we can still consider some last minute contributions. I would also like to point you to various topics during the EOF sessions that are about ipv6 (IPv6 Routing Table, IPv6 in Real Life - Deployment of Popular Servers in IPv6, IPv6 Routing Tutorial, DHCPv6), or that will cover ipv6 in addition to ipv4 (What is Wrong With the DNS?, UMTS/GPRS Systems). Thanks and see you in Amsterdam! David Kessens --- Agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE53 When: Wed Oct 4, 17:00-18:00 Where: Grand Ballroom, Krasnapolsky Hotel, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Quick update from the RIPE NCC regarding ipv6 services (RIPE NCC) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (discussion) (Gert Doering) D. Impact of 6bone address space depreciation (discussion - presentations welcome) E. IPv6 Multihoming Solutions (Marla Azinger) F. Proposal for IPv6 Multihoming Using PA Space (Iljitsch van Beijnum) Background reading material: http://www.muada.com/drafts/draft-van-beijnum-v6ops-pa-mhome-community-01.t… G. Impact of ip6.int deprecation (discussion - presentations welcome) H. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) I. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

2 1

Multihoming in IPv6 using PA space
by Iljitsch van Beijnum 28 Sep '06

28 Sep '06

[Going out to routing-wg and ipv6-wg, trim as needed in follow-ups] Before the last IETF meeting there was some discussion about the difficulties in multihoming using a prefix out of PA space from an ISP in IPv6. Because many ISPs filter at /32 or /35 in IPv6, the /48s (or /56s) used for multihoming are often filtered out. After some discussion with people from the IETF v6ops wg, I've written the draft mentioned below, outlining the problem and proposing a BGP community to tag the prefixes used for this so they can be un-filtered as needed. Feedback from people involved with and/or an interest in IPv6 routing is highly appreciated. I'd be happy to discuss the draft in either the routing or IPv6 wgs, or talk about it briefly at the end of my IPv6 routing tutorial on wednesday morning. And of course one-on-one in the hallway. The -01 with only minor changes should be up soon, or you can find it at http://www.muada.com/drafts/draft-van-beijnum-v6ops-pa-mhome- community-01.txt Begin forwarded message: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > Title : BGP Community for PA Multihoming > Author(s) : I. van Beijnum > Filename : draft-van-beijnum-v6ops-pa-mhome-community-00.txt > Pages : 8 > Date : 2006-9-11 > When an organization wants to connect to the internet using two or > more > Internet Service Providers (multihoming), this is usually done by > setting up BGP routing between the organization in question and > each of > its ISPs. For this, the multihomed organization needs a block of > address space. This can either be a provider independent (PI) > address block that belongs to the organization, or a block out of > the provider aggregatable (PA) address space of one its ISPs. > With IPv4, an address block of at least /24 will generally be suitable > for multihoming, whether its origin is PI or PA. However, until now, > ISPs were encouraged to only accept /32 prefixes from IPv6 PA space, > while end-users generally receive a /48. This makes multihoming > with PA > address space in IPv6 very difficult. This memo describes a new > well-known BGP community attribute for tagging prefixes used for > multihoming with PA space in order to facilitate filtering, rather > than > filter based on prefix length alone. > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-van-beijnum-v6ops-pa- > mhome-community-00.txt

1 0

Call for agenda topics & draft agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE53
by David Kessens 13 Sep '06

13 Sep '06

During next RIPE meeting, our working group is scheduled to meet: Wed Oct 4, 17:00-18:00, Grand Ballroom, Krasnapolsky Hotel, Amsterdam I have prepared a draft agenda with all our standard items. However, the meeting will only be a success if we get a lot of active participation from all participants. In fact there is little reason to have a working group meeting scheduled if we don't get other topics than the standard topics. Is there anything that you have been thinking about regarding the deployment of ipv6 in the european region ? It doesn't matter whether it is a brief topic, whether you have slides or simply would like to ask me to find a speaker. Just send me a quick mail! One thing that I personally was thinking about is the expiration of the 6bone address space. Is there anybody who is willing to give us an overview on what happened, and whether there were any positive or negative effects ? Or anybody knows what the vatican is planning to do with their address space ? Thanks! David Kessens --- Draft Agenda (v1) for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE53 When: Wed Oct 4, 17:00-18:00 Where: Grand Ballroom, Krasnapolsky Hotel, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing - approval of the minutes (David Kessens) B. Quick update from the RIPE NCC regarding ipv6 services (RIPE NCC) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (discussion) (Gert Doering) D. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) E. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

1 0

IPv6 Benchmarking - Sept'2006
by Carlos Friacas 05 Sep '06

05 Sep '06

Hello, You can fill in (yet another) survey about IPv6 at: http://surveys.ipv6.eu This survey is part of the European IPv6 Task-Force Steering Commitee's Benchmarking Activity, in the scope of project IST-2-004572-CA, partly funded by the EC. Your cooperation is needed and very welcome! Please also help this message reach the mailboxes of people on your communities, even to those folks which are still far from using IPv6, but who can spare 10 mins to fill this form. This survey is focused on metrics we cannot have input without direct intervention from humans. The outcome of it, plus the data we periodically collect automatically (from several sources) will be worked/aggregated and published on http://www.ipv6.eu Stay tuned! ps: sorry for any duplicate messages. Best Regards, ./Carlos -------------- Wide Area Network (WAN) Workgroup, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional http://www.fccn.pt "Internet is just routes (191157/571), naming (millions) and... people!"

3 2

[info@arin.net: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations]
by David Kessens 31 Aug '06

31 Aug '06

For your information. Please post followups regarding these policy changes to the address policy working group only. David Kessens --- ----- Forwarded message from Member Services <info(a)arin.net> ----- Delivered-To: arin-announce(a)lists.arin.net From: Member Services <info(a)arin.net> To: ARIN Announce <arin-announce(a)arin.net>, "'Public Policy Mailing List'" <ppml(a)arin.net> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 19:22:07 -0400 Subject: [arin-announce] NRPM version 2006.2 - New Policy Implementations Reply-To: info(a)arin.net On 9 May 2006, the ARIN Board of Trustees, based on the recommendation of the Advisory Council and noting that the Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process had been followed, adopted the following policy proposals: 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites 2005-8: Proposal to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilisation requirement 2005-9: 4-Byte AS Number These policy proposals have been incorporated into version 2006.2 of the ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM) which is effective 30 August 2006. NRPM version 2006.2 supersedes previous versions. See Appendix A of the NRPM for information regarding changes to the manual. The NRPM can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html Appendix A can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm_changelog.html On 11 July 2006, the ARIN Board of Trustees added IPv6 Assignments to the ARIN fee schedule. The Board waived all but $500 of the IPv6 Initial Assignment fee through 31 December 2007. The fee schedule can be found at: http://www.arin.net/billing/fee_schedule.html For information about requesting an IPv6 assignment, please see the guidelines at: http://www.arin.net/registration/guidelines/ipv6_assignment.html Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) _______________________________________________ ARIN-announce mailing list ARIN-announce(a)arin.net http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce "To Unsubscribe,<mailto:arin-announce-request@arin.net?subject=unsubscribe>." ----- End forwarded message -----

4 4

2001:7f9::/32 still being announced even though the 'experiment' has finished 2 days ago?
by Jeroen Massar 25 Aug '06

25 Aug '06

Hi, inet6num: 2001:07F9::/32 org: ORG-CA59-RIPE netname: CONSULINTEL-20040713 descr: Experimental Prefix ======================== Duration of assignment: ======================== Start date: 2004-07-19 End date: 2006-07-19 ======================== Details of Experiment: http://www.consulintel.euro6ix.org ======================== But according to: http://noc.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?find=2001:7f9::/32 it is still being announced. Also the mentioned URL doesn't contain any 'details of experiment' at all. What is up with this? Has this become free IPv6 space? GRH automarked it as reclaimed due to the expiry date btw. Greets, Jeroen

4 4

IPv6 access to ftp.ripe.net
by James Aldridge 28 Jun '06

28 Jun '06

[Apologies for duplicate e-mails] Dear Colleagues, IPv6 access to ftp.ripe.net is currently not possible. IPv4 access is unaffected. The current ScreenOS firewall software is unable to support extended passive-mode FTP. We have therefore temporarily removed the AAAA record for ftp.ripe.net from the DNS. We hope to restore IPv6 access as quickly as possible and will inform you when this occurs. We apologise for any inconvenience. Regards, James Aldridge Systems & Network Engineer RIPE NCC Operations Group

1 0

6to4 address utilisation
by Thu Thuy 09 Jun '06

09 Jun '06

Hi, I have a question about 6to4 address utilisation. May i post it here ? Thanks everyone for your guidance. 6to4 is a tunnel method. From an IPv4 address, we have /48 6to4 IPv6 space. So i'm wonder if this /48 range can be commonly used for our IPv6 network (workstations, servers) like native IPv6, or it just be used only for tunnel, to connect native IPv6 lands. Thank you once more, Thu Thuy Development & Research Department. Vietnam Internet Network Information Center - VNNIC.

1 0

V6 connectivity
by Max Tulyev 09 Jun '06

09 Jun '06

Hi! I see v6 connectivity is much worse than v4: traceroute to kite-www.ripe.net (2001:610:240:0:a843::8) from 2a01:d8:0:99:211:11ff:fe1f:bfc9, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets 1 2a01:d8:0:99::1 (2a01:d8:0:99::1) 0.782 ms 0.719 ms 2.227 ms 2 2a01:d8:0:1::1 (2a01:d8:0:1::1) 40.904 ms 2.346 ms 2.754 ms 3 2001:b08:0:2::1 (2001:b08:0:2::1) 35.849 ms 7.533 ms 2.576 ms 4 2001:b08:b08:3::2 (2001:b08:b08:3::2) 35.205 ms 25.399 ms 25.649 ms 5 se-kth.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f02c::1) 29.649 ms 25.579 ms 25.545 ms 6 se-ov.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f027::2) 33.705 ms 25.539 ms 25.927 ms 7 dk-gw2.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f03f::2) 39.785 ms 33.901 ms 33.688 ms 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 nikipv6.ripe.net (2001:7f8:1::a500:3333:1) 214.93 ms 226.989 ms 215.676 ms 13 kite-www.ripe.net (2001:610:240:0:a843::8) 214.484 ms 215.588 ms 221.891 ms 1: greentheatre (195.209.50.18) 0.273ms pmtu 1500 1: gw.gpt.ru (195.209.50.1) 1.366ms 2: LEO-MG-2.Garnet.ru (195.209.63.20) 57.568ms 3: d2-msk-m9-ge0-0-0-v102.ruscomnet.ru (80.249.128.117) asymm 4 3.034ms 4: c1-msk-m9-ge0-1-0.ruscomnet.ru (80.249.132.9) asymm 5 4.265ms 5: d1-fft-as0.ruscomnet.ru (80.249.132.26) asymm 6 51.486ms 6: gigabitethernet3-0.104.gw9.fft4.de.ALTER.NET (139.4.144.5) 51.952ms 7: so-7-1-0.XR1.FFT4.ALTER.NET (149.227.48.25) asymm 8 52.247ms 8: so-0-1-0.TR2.FFT1.ALTER.NET (146.188.8.138) asymm 9 52.400ms 9: so-5-1-0.TR2.AMS2.ALTER.NET (146.188.2.169) asymm 10 58.617ms 10: POS2-0.BR1.AMS3.ALTER.NET (146.188.3.218) 58.315ms 11: Amsterdam1.ripe.net (195.69.144.68) 53.182ms 12: kite.ripe.net (193.0.0.214) asymm 11 53.245ms reached Resume: pmtu 1500 hops 12 back 11 And some parts of v6 Internet is completly unreachable. Is it my bug or real situation? -- WBR, Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253@FIDO) "Garant-Park-Telecom", +7 095 783-3-783

6 5

New ROUTE-SET and RIPE document: Address Space Managed by the RIPE NCC
by leo vegoda 31 May '06

31 May '06

[Apologies for duplicates] Dear Colleagues, We have updated the RIPE document "Address Space Managed by the RIPE NCC" to include references to a ROUTE-SET object describing the address space allocated to the RIPE NCC by the IANA. The new version is ripe-380 and can be found on our web site at: https://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html We hope the ROUTE-SET object is useful. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

FYI: Personal invitation to attend the Conference: "Convergence: New Opportunities for Accelerating the IPv6 Momentum"
by Martin Vyskocil 04 May '06

04 May '06

Dear All, please find below the inventation to the Converence "Convergence: New Opportunities for Accelerating the IPv6 Momentum" on 1-2 June, 2006 in Vienna, Austria > The Event is organised by the European Commission and is sponsored and hosted > by Telekom Austria under the auspices of the Austrian Presidency and with the > support of the European IPv6 Task Force. Aganda and registration is on the conference webpage regards Martin Vyskocil ---------------------------- Martin VYSKOCIL Telekom Austria AG PTM/DW/TRADAT VM404-RIPE Von: Susannah.SOCHALL(a)ext.cec.eu.int Gesendet: Dienstag, 02. Mai 2006 11:16 An: INFSO-RI-IPV6PRESIDENCYCONFERENCE(a)cec.eu.int Cc: Jean-Luc.DOREL(a)cec.eu.int Betreff: Personal invitation to attend the Conference: "Convergence: New Opportunities for Accelerating the IPv6 Momentum" Dear Colleague I am writing to you to invite you to attend a Conference on 1-2 June, 2006 in Vienna, Austria - entitled "Convergence: New Opportunities for Accelerating the IPv6 Momentum". The Event is organised by the European Commission and is sponsored and hosted by Telekom Austria under the auspices of the Austrian Presidency and with the support of the European IPv6 Task Force. After years of investment in the technology of IPv6 it is time to consider business aspects of its deployment. One of the highlights of the event will be the presentation of concrete IPv6 applications in various sectors, such as Automotive, Aeronautics, Defence, Research Networks, Media, and Consumer. At a time where Convergence is occurring both in the fix-mobile domain and in the Voice/Data/Video domain, this event will be the place where experts from industry will comment on the impact of this movement on IPv6 deployments. This conference will also be an occasion to learn about successful experiences in IPv6 convergence in China, Japan, South Africa, South Korea and the US. The event will be honoured by two keynote speakers: Brian Carpenter, Chairman of the IETF and Hiroshi Esaki, a pionneer of the Internet in Japan. A Gala dinner will take place at the prestigious Hofburg Palace on Thursday, June 1. We would very much welcome your participation and your contribution to the discussions during the event. Attendance to this event as well as to the Gala dinner is by invitation only. Please consider this as an official invitation from the IPv6 Convergence Organisation Committee. The Event has a limited number of seats, therefore the Organisation Committee kindly asks you to confirm you participation via the web site: http://www.ipv6-convergence-vienna.net/ Also, due to the high tourist season, it is important that you book your hotel in advance. A hotel list is available on the web, you are kindly invited to register by yourself. For further information, please contact me. Yours sincerely, Jean-Luc Dorel On behalf of the IPv6 Convergence Event Organisation Committee

1 0

The Pope gets IPv6 PA space (not PI :)
by Jeroen Massar 04 May '06

04 May '06

inet6num: 2a01:b8::/32 netname: VA-VATICAN-20060418 descr: Holy See - Vatican City State country: VA So now that IPv6 is officially blessed go deploy it :) Greets, Jeroen Reply-To explicitly set to myself so that people don't reply to this silly post to all the lists... override to the one you like if you want </back to your normal schedule>

7 10

Agenda for ipv6 wg RIPE52
by David Kessens 27 Apr '06

27 Apr '06

Please see below for the final version of the agenda for the ipv6 working group session at RIPE 52. Thanks! David Kessens --- Agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE52 When: Thu Apr 27 2006, 17:00-18:00 Where: Room Dolmabahce, Ceylan Intercontinental Hotel, Istanbul Turkey A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing - Action items: 51.1 - Ask the RIPE NCC to revise the acronym list in the registration package to remove obsolete terms as TLA & NLA. (David Kessens) Status: Completed 51.2 - Create a link from the IPv6 WG page to the APNIC events page: http://apnic.net/info/calendar/index.html (RIPE NCC) Status: To be done 51.3 - Provide traffic reports on ipv6 usage during the RIPE meetings. If available, data from earlier meetings will be made available as well. (RIPE NCC) Status: Completed (David Kessens) B. Quick update from the RIPE NCC regarding ipv6 services (James Aldridge) C. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? - ipv6 traffic during the RIPE meetings (James Aldridge) - ... D. Global IPv6 routing table status (discussion) (Gert Doering) E. ip6.int deprecation (Andrei Robachevsky) F. 6bone adresses about to expire (discussion) G. IPv6 allocation policies, anything we need to do ? (Input from the audience) H. Future of the working group (David Kessens) I. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience, Jordi Palet Martinez) Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

1 0

Call for agenda topics & draft agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE52
by David Kessens 23 Apr '06

23 Apr '06

During next RIPE meeting, our working group is scheduled to meet: Thu Apr 27, 17:00-18:00, room Dolmabahce I have prepared a draft agenda with all our standard items. However, the meeting will only be a success if we get a lot of active participation from all our participants. To achieve this goal, I would like to invite everybody to bring up their own topics on the list, or directly to me. Topics should be relevant to the operational issues regarding ipv6 deployment. Note that we don't require you to bring powerpoint slides or whatever, neither does a topic need to be of a particular predefined length. We are more interested in the content of the topic! Obviously, you are also very welcome to volunteer somebody else than yourself to give a presentation and to lead a discussion on a topic that is of interest for our working group. Thanks! David Kessens --- Draft Agenda (v1) for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE52 When: Thu Apr 27 2006, 17:00-18:00 Where: Room Dolmabahce, Ceylan Intercontinental Hotel, Istanbul Turkey A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing - approval of the minutes (David Kessens) B. Quick update from the RIPE NCC regarding ipv6 services (RIPE NCC) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (discussion) (Gert Doering) D. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) E. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) Y. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

2 3

New Document available: RIPE-376
by RIPE NCC Document Announcement Service 20 Apr '06

20 Apr '06

<<< our apologies for duplicate e-mails >>> New RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A new document is available from the RIPE document store. Ref: ripe-376 Title: Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy for Allocation of IPv6 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries Author: AfriNIC APNIC ARIN LACNIC RIPE NCC Date: 19 April 2006 Format: PDF=10551 TXT=4280 Obsoletes: Obsoleted by: Updates: Updated by: Short content description ------------------------- This document describes the policy governing the allocation of IPv6 address space from the IANA to the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). This document does not stipulate performance requirements in the provision of services by IANA to an RIR in accordance with this policy. Such requirements will be specified by appropriate agreements between ICANN and the NRO. Accessing the RIPE document store --------------------------------- You can access the RIPE documents in HTML format via our website at the following URL: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-376.html The RIPE Document Store is also available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new documents on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-376.pdf PDF version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-376.txt plain text version Kind Regards, Jeroen Bet RIPE NCC Content Webmaster

1 0

Re: [ppml] PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 18 Apr '06

18 Apr '06

Hi all, My first idea was submitting a PI IPv6 policy proposal next Monday to RIPE and the rest of the regions, trying to get a consensus for a "global" policy on this, but as this thread is being followed up in several mail exploders, to avoid a long cross-posting, I think it will be better to start some discussion already in a mailing list which is global, and actually I think we have the right one ... global-v6(a)lists.apnic.net So, if you aren't subscribed in the global-v6(a)lists.apnic.net, and you're interested in this thread, please subscribe at http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6 If you're late because the Eastern, the archives are also available at http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/global-v6/ Regards, Jordi > De: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet(a)consulintel.es> > Responder a: <jordi.palet(a)consulintel.es> > Fecha: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 13:39:07 +0200 > Para: "v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org" <v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org>, "ppml(a)arin.net" > <ppml(a)arin.net>, "shim6(a)psg.com" <shim6(a)psg.com> > Conversación: [ppml] PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN > Asunto: Re: [ppml] PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN > > Hi Owen, > > You said it: If somebody find the good solution, it will be attractive to > the people to go for it. Otherwise, you always have the chance to become an > LIR. My proposal actually is already considering this point and a way to > avoid a need for renumbering if that happens. > > I just want to make sure that we have a way-out if it becomes necessary, but > avoid a showstopper now. I think is it possible. > > I don't have a technical solution yet (and agree with your views on this in > the email below in general), but I'm confident we will have. If it will take > 4 years from now, or just 2, who knows, so my proposal is ensuring that we > have those 4 years+3 for allowing the people either to return the block, or > become an LIR and avoid renumbering an any changes in their network. > > By the way, it may happen, and I'm hoping so, that the technical solution > don't make necessary to return the PI block anymore, and in that case, we > will be even able to remove at that time the "temporarily" point in the > policy (if it becomes accepted). > > Regards, > Jordi > > > > >> De: Owen DeLong <owen(a)delong.com> >> Responder a: <owen(a)delong.com> >> Fecha: Fri, 14 Apr 2006 03:48:34 -0700 >> Para: <jordi.palet(a)consulintel.es>, "v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org" >> <v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org>, >> "ppml(a)arin.net" <ppml(a)arin.net>, "shim6(a)psg.com" <shim6(a)psg.com> >> Asunto: Re: [ppml] PI addressing in IPv6 advances in ARIN >> >> >> >> --On April 14, 2006 12:20:06 PM +0200 JORDI PALET MARTINEZ >> <jordi.palet(a)consulintel.es> wrote: >> >> [snip] >>> However, I want to balance this with the medium-long term implications >>> created in the routing table and with the time needed to build and deploy >>> a better technical solution (or several) which is accepted by the >>> community. >>> >> I think we first need to define what we consider a solution... See below. >> >>> So my proposal basically is about having PI now everywhere (once ARIN >>> adopt it, is unfair not having it in other regions), but those PI >>> allocations for multihoming should be temporary and those address blocks >>> returned to the RIRs some time (lets say 3 years) after the new technical >>> solution is declared as a valid one. >>> >> I would not actually support this idea. The whole point of having PI >> space is to have the addresses for a long-term. Having a timeframe for >> return would simply restore the same barrier to entry that existed >> prior to passing the policy. >> >> Other RIRs are free to implement whatever v6 PI policy they feel is >> appropriate for their region. I would support a globally standardized >> v6 PI policy along the lines of ARIN 2005-1. >> >> However, I would like to argue that if the new technical solution will >> benefit from the return of this address space, it is most likely not >> truly a solution, but, instead, another clever hack piled on top of >> the existing set of hacks. >> >> I suppose if someone found the magic bullet to make geotopological >> addressing really work, that might qualify. However, I have very low >> expectations in that area. >> >> Absent that, any true solution will involve making the size of the routing >> table independent of the number of PI (or even PA) blocks issued by >> the RIRs or will make the size of the routing table practically >> irrelevant. >> >> I know this isn't the easy solution, but, we need to look long and >> hard at the way we do things. I think that solving these problems >> is going to require a significant paradigm shift. Assuming that we >> can use IP addresses for both end system identification and for >> routing topology indicators is how we created this problem. I don't >> see solving it without breaking that assumption, at least at the >> interdomain level. >> >> >>> At this way, on the long-run, we will not have routing table implications, >>> but we allow now the people that want to move ahead only if they have a >>> multihoming solution doing so. >>> >> If you think there is a possible solution (a real solution, not just >> a hack that postpones the inevitable at the expense of usability >> like CIDR did), then I'd like to hear what you are thinking. >> >>> This 3-years time for getting a multihoming network back to the new >>> technical solution (once adopted) is enough time, I think (it could be >>> changed to 5 years if needed, or whatever), so nobody today see the >>> temporarily of the proposal as a showstopper to go for it now. >>> >> I think you underestimate the momentum and requirements of the modern >> enterprise if you believe that to be true. Any capability available >> in v4 that is not available on at least equal or better terms in v6 >> is a deterrent to v6 deployment. >> >> The ability to get permanent addresses which do not have to be returned >> when you switch providers or renumbered on a schedule determined by >> some external organization is a major example of such a capability. >> >> Owen >> >> >> -- >> If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me. > > > > > ********************************************** > The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org > > Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit > Slides available at: > http://www.ipv6-es.com > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or > confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the > individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that > any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this > information, including attached files, is prohibited. > > > > > > > ********************************************** > The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org > > Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit > Slides available at: > http://www.ipv6-es.com > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or > confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the > individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that > any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this > information, including attached files, is prohibited. > > ********************************************** The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit Slides available at: http://www.ipv6-es.com This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

2 1

Thank you -->- Request information: black fiber !
by brian forgrave 17 Apr '06

17 Apr '06

1 0

Problems with ipv6 router
by Andrei Robachevsky 13 Apr '06

13 Apr '06

Dear Colleagues, [We are sorry for any duplicate mails you might receive] This afternoon we experienced a problem with our IPv6 router. Problems started at 13:50, and we are still facing problem. None of our IPv4 services are affected, as these are dealt with by other routers. Affected services, which we offer on IPv6 are: - FTP: ftp.ripe.net - WWW: www.ripe.net - DNS: ns*.ripe.net - Whois: whois.ripe.net We suspect that an interfacecard of our dedicated IPv6 router is faulty, and at the moment an engineer is working on it. The long term solution is that we will replace this router. We apologise for any disruption or delay this may have caused. If you have any further questions about this matter, please send an e-mail to ops(a)ripe.net. Kind regards Andrei Robachevsky CTO, RIPE NCC

2 1

2005 IPv4 Address Use Report
by Iljitsch van Beijnum 01 Jan '06

01 Jan '06

According to AfriNIC, APNIC, ARIN, LACNIC and RIPE NCC statistics as published on their respective FTP servers, they gave out 165.45 million IPv4 addresses in 2005. Out of 3706.65 million usable IPv4 addresses, 1468.61 million are still available as of januari 1, 2006. Breakdown by Regional Internet Registry over the past few years: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 AfriNIC 0.56 0.38 0.25 0.21 0.51 1.89 APNIC 21.08 28.84 27.08 33.08 42.92 53.97 ARIN 30.96 32.76 21.02 22.14 33.51 36.30 LACNIC 0.88 1.57 0.65 2.62 3.77 11.04 RIPE NCC 24.88 25.39 19.94 29.72 47.75 62.25 Total 78.35 88.95 68.93 87.77 128.45 165.45 AfriNIC gives out address space in Africa, APNIC in the Asia-Pacific region, ARIN in North America, LACNIC in Latin American and the Caribbean and the RIPE NCC in Europe, the former Soviet Union and the Middle East. Note that the RIRs tend to change their records retroactively from time to time. For instance, the januari 1, 2005 records show that only 117.3 million addresses were given out in 2004. Also, reclaimed address space isn't listed explicitly. From the fact that the 1-1-2005 records show 1939 million addresses given out before 2004 but the 1-1-2006 records show 1928.48 million addresses for the same period, we can conclude that 11.15 million addresses given out before 2004 have been reclaimed in 2005. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA, part of ICANN) keeps an overview of the IPv4 address space at http://www.iana.org/ assignments/ipv4-address-space. The list consists of 256 blocks of 16.78 million addresses. Breakdown: Delegated to Blocks Addresses (millions) AfriNIC 1 16.78 APNIC 16 268.44 ARIN 23 385.88 LACNIC 4 67.11 RIPE NCC 19 318.77 Various 50 838.86 End-user 43 721.42 Available 65 1090.52 Of the 1895.83 million addresses delegated to the five Regional Internet Registries, 1517.74 million have been delegated to end-users or ISPs by the RIRs, and 378.09 million are still available. Along with the 1090.52 million addresses still available in the IANA global pool this makes the total number of available addresses 1468.61 million. The size of address blocks given follows an interesting trend. The table below shows the number of requests for a certain range of block sizes (equal or higher than the first, lower than the second value). 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 < 1000 326 474 547 745 1022 1309 1000 - 8000 652 1176 897 1009 1516 1891 8000 - 64k 1440 868 822 1014 1100 1039 64k - 500k 354 262 163 215 404 309 500k - 2M 19 39 29 46 61 60 > 2M 3 5 5 6 7 18 The number of blocks in the two smallest categories have increased rapidly, but not as fast as the number of blocks in the largest category, in relative numbers at least. However, the increase in large blocks has a very dramatic effect while the small blocks are insignificant, when looking at the millions of addresses involved: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 < 1000 0.10 0.16 0.18 0.25 0.35 0.44 1000 - 8000 2.42 4.47 3.23 3.45 4.49 5.07 8000 - 64k 18.79 12.81 11.35 14.00 15.99 15.46 64k - 500k 35.98 32.19 20.28 25.51 42.01 34.23 500k - 2M 12.68 24.64 21.30 31.98 44.63 41.63 > 2M 8.39 14.68 12.58 12.58 20.97 68.62 The medium-sized blocks seem most affected by the burst of the internet bubble. Another way to look at the same data: Year Blocks Addresses (M) Average block size 2000 2794 78.35 28043 2001 2824 88.95 31497 2002 2463 68.93 27985 2003 3035 87.77 28921 2004 4110 128.45 31252 2005 4626 165.45 35765 The 2222.38 million addresses currently in use aren't very evenly distributed over the countries in the world. The current top 15 is: Country Addresses US 1324.93 M United States JP 143.00 M Japan EU 113.87 M Multi-country in Europe CN 74.39 M China CA 67.43 M Canada DE 51.13 M Germany FR 45.16 M France KR 41.91 M Korea UK 40.18 M United Kingdom GB 33.63 M Great Britain AU 26.87 M Australia IT 18.39 M Italy BR 17.17 M Brazil NL 16.40 M Netherlands ES 16.29 M Spain The US holds 60% of the IPv4 address space. The other countries in the list together hold another 32%. A copy of this information and a tool to perform queries on the base data is available at http://www.bgpexpert.com/addrspace2005.php

1 0

New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to the RIPE NCC
by filiz＠ripe.net 31 Dec '05

31 Dec '05

[Apologies for Duplicates] Dear Colleagues The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2A01:0000::/16 from the IANA in December 2005. 2A01:0000::/23 was allocated to the RIPE NCC in July 2005. This latest range includes that previous allocation. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. You can find more information about the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC on our web site at: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html Regards, Filiz Yilmaz RIPE NCC

5 6

Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 PI
by Roger Jorgensen 28 Dec '05

28 Dec '05

On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Lea Roberts wrote: <snip> > the problem with using ASNs is that when you think over the projected > lifetime of IPv6, there will be *lots* of ASNs. Note that the 4-byte ASN > draft is entering the standards track in IETF. Don't think that tying PI > to ASNs is anything more that passing the problem to the next generation > (if that long... :-) > > It would seem obvious that as network connectivity becomes essential for > doing business, it must be reliable. It is unwise to carry forward the > IPv4 multi-homing model for network resilience with just faith that the > system will be able to scale to an ever larger number of routes. IPv6 has > so far failed to deliver on its original promise of seamless renumbering > and multi-homing using multiple prefixes. The hard problems still need to > be solved in a way that can scale for decades to come. Can't we all just drop using the word multihoming and IPv6 PI? They all reflect back to how thing was done with IPv4 and those ways are doomed to fail with IPv6 simply due to the size of the IP space. Last I checked around there were some promissing new proposal on the way for how to solve this very basic problem. And in the meantime, drop the thought about multihoming and PI space, start to think about other ways to use the possibility IPv6 give us. Just to mention maybe the biggest advantage, we have that extended header part of IPv6, it give us endless possibilities. and yes I do have some idea about how it can be done but no one really bother to consider geo-based IP's either so... :) Not to forget it quite likely will undermine the entire business case for how ISP's today operate. -- ------------------------------ Roger Jorgensen | rogerj(a)stud.cs.uit.no | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | roger(a)jorgensen.no -------------------------------------------------------

29 109