- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Minutes of ripe81
by Jetten Raymond 17 Nov '20

17 Nov '20

Dear Working group, Below are the draft minutes from ripe 81. If you have any comments or remarks please let us know by replying to this email. A big thanks to Nikolas for doing the scribe. If we do not hear any comments these minutes will be published in about 2 weeks from now. Rgds, Ray, Jen, Benedikt. IPv6 Working Group Minutes - RIPE 81 Date: 29 October 2020, 13:00 - 13:45 WG Chairs: Benedikt Stockebrand, Jen Linkova, Raymond Jetten Scribe: Nikolas Pediaditis Status: Draft Welcome - Agenda Bashing The Chairs The minutes of IPv6 Working Group session from RIPE 80 were accepted as final. There were no questions or comments. RIPE554-bis - Tim Chown The presentation is available here: https://ripe81.ripe.net/presentations/58-ripe81-ipv6wg-ripe554bis-final.pdf Dmitry Serbulov (Alpha Net Telecom LTD) asked if it would be possible to share material with attendees prior to the start of each session. Raymond Jetten suggested that he should join the IPv6 WG mailing list. Bringing IPv6 Everywhere - Nico Schottelius The presentation is available here: https://ripe81.ripe.net/presentations/73-ripe81-bringing-ipv6-everywhere.pdf Ondrej Caletka (RIPE NCC) asked if connectivity will break if the host network becomes dual-stacked, or at worst, if the host network becomes IPv6-only. Nico replied that it wouldn't. IPv4 connectivity would still be available, and IPv6 would be added to it. Kurt Kayser (BDBOS) asked if geo-IP will always show that the VIIRB-users are in Switzerland. Nico Schottelius replied that at the moment, yes. And there is a bracket opening as soon as they are able to talk better to the RIPE API to change the registration of the /48 networks. It will be easy to actually assign the network to your location. Christoph Berkemeier (DB Station&Service AG) asked if the IPv6 distribution is stateless only. Nico confirmed that it is stateless at the moment but that could be changed if desired. Veronica McKillop (UK IPv6 Council) asked where the device is being manufactured. Nico replied that it's manufactured in China and shipped to and configured in Switzerland. Dmitry Serbulov (Alpha Net Telecom LTD) asked if open source software is used between the device and the server it connects to. Nico said that the software used, WireGuard and OpenWRT at the moment, are fully open source. Vesna Manojlovic (RIPE NCC) mentioned that a hackathon about RIPE Atlas software probes is taking place in November. She asked if Nico would be interested in joining and seeing how they could combine his router with RIPE Atlas software probes if possible. Nico replied that it would be a really cool project. Christoph Berkemeier (DB Station&Service AG) asked if there is a virtual appliance to enable legacy hosters. Nico replied that it builds on top of your existing IPv4 network so everything that's legacy continues to work. It's not a replacement. The nice thing about IPv6 is that although it is incompatible to IPv4 this also means that it runs in parallel to the existing infrastructure, allowing the legacy network to continue to work. Recent Improvements in IPv6 Addressing - Fernando Gont The presentation is available here: https://ripe81.ripe.net/presentations/72-fgont-ripe81-ipv6-wg-ipv6-addressi… Osamah Barakat (Siemens AG) asked if Windows 10 supports the latest IPv6 RFC or it is only Linux-based OS that support seen in the slide. Fernando Gont replied that it's surprising that they don't support RFC 7217 as one the authors worked for Microsoft. They also haven't implemented the update of 4941 either. However, he was less concerned about 4941, as compared to the support for 7217, as it has not been published as an RFC. End of the session.

1 0

Re: [ipv6-wg] RIPE554-bis
by Eric Vyncke (evyncke) 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Trying to reply to all previous email messages in one email ;-) Look for EV> -éric-happy-to-see-this-initiative -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net> on behalf of Tim Chown via ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net> Reply-To: Tim Chown <Tim.Chown(a)jisc.ac.uk> Date: Wednesday, 28 October 2020 at 18:19 To: "ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net" <ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net> Subject: [ipv6-wg] RIPE554-bis Hi, I’m posting here as a heads-up that an effort has begun to revise RIPE-554, involving the original authors, myself and Tim Winters. We have a 5 min slot tomorrow in the 1pm CET IPv6 WG session to flag the work, to solicit input. The original publication was back in November 2010 with RIPE-501, which was updated in June 2012 with RIPE-554. There’s many references that have been obsoleted, and potentially much to add or remove. References to 2G cellular date the document. We’d like to begin by addressing the more strategic / structural questions. Such high level questions include: - Is there agreement to progress a –bis version now? Eight years have passed, people ask for guidance… EV> YES, please do ! knowing that RIPE554 was already a -bis, I would prefer a 501-ter though ;-) - Should we keep the scope to (largely) enterprise or expand it? If so, to what? EV> large/medium enterprise should indeed be the focus, consumer do not care and (wishful thinking ?) providers know better. Although, that I would love to see the IPv6 check-list for a smart TV ;-) - Is the linkage to the IPv6 Ready Logo programme still desired? EV> a couple of months ago, I check with several end-users and vendors, and, yes, it is still important (to be surprise to be honest, sorry Tim W) - Are there new classes of equipment to add, e.g. IoT/low power, WiFi controllers, …? EV> perhaps extend to applications? Cloud providers ? Perhaps remove consumer switch, load balancer, and network security ? - Are specific sections outdated, or are there significant new sections to add? EV> many "recents" RFC (including RFC 8200), focus on RA extensions - Should we add guidance on applying the content to different use cases? As separate docs? Appendices? We’ve currently working on the -bis as a Google doc, for which there’s a PDF of the current snapshot available from: https://go6.si/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/RIPE554-bis-v_01.pdf For now, please comment to the list, and maybe start a new thread for new topics. Tim

1 0

ip address pricing and protocol selection
by Wolfgang Zenker 31 Oct '20

31 Oct '20

Hello WG, I have a question for those of you that offer some kind of hosting. Do you charge your customers extra for IPv4 or IPv6 addresses? And if you have changed your policy on that recently, did that change your customers behaviour regarding their choice on ordering and publishing IPv4 / IPv6 addresses for the hosted services? Reason for asking: At our own hosting services we started out offering dual stack by default some 6 years ago, moved to ipv6-only by default about 2 years ago and since about one year we are charging extra for IPv4 addresses. This has led to a change in behaviour in our customer base, and I want to see if others are seeing similar changes or a different situation. You can reply off-list and I will summarize the results to the group. Please state if I should mention your name in the summary. Greetings, Wolfgang Zenker -- punkt.de GmbH Tel. +49 721 9109-500 Fax: -100 .infrastructure info(a)punkt.de https://infrastructure.punkt.de/ Kaiserallee 13a CEO: Jürgen Egeling, Daniel Lienert, Fabian Stein D-76133 Karlsruhe AG Mannheim HRB 108285

2 1

RIPE554-bis
by Tim Chown 30 Oct '20

30 Oct '20

Hi, I’m posting here as a heads-up that an effort has begun to revise RIPE-554, involving the original authors, myself and Tim Winters. We have a 5 min slot tomorrow in the 1pm CET IPv6 WG session to flag the work, to solicit input. The original publication was back in November 2010 with RIPE-501, which was updated in June 2012 with RIPE-554. There’s many references that have been obsoleted, and potentially much to add or remove. References to 2G cellular date the document. We’d like to begin by addressing the more strategic / structural questions. Such high level questions include: - Is there agreement to progress a –bis version now? Eight years have passed, people ask for guidance… - Should we keep the scope to (largely) enterprise or expand it? If so, to what? - Is the linkage to the IPv6 Ready Logo programme still desired? - Are there new classes of equipment to add, e.g. IoT/low power, WiFi controllers, …? - Are specific sections outdated, or are there significant new sections to add? - Should we add guidance on applying the content to different use cases? As separate docs? Appendices? We’ve currently working on the -bis as a Google doc, for which there’s a PDF of the current snapshot available from: https://go6.si/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/RIPE554-bis-v_01.pdf For now, please comment to the list, and maybe start a new thread for new topics. Tim

7 9

Rquirements for VPN
by christian bretterhofer 29 Oct '20

29 Oct '20

After reading https://go6.si/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/RIPE554-bis-v_01.pdf I see VPNs as part of the Network Security Equipment. But in my opinium there is not enough definition to be a VPN quality criteria. VPN external Protocol Must support IPv6 clients to IPv6 servers (6-to-6) ( Ipv6 Only) VPN external Protocol Must support IPv4 clients to IPv4 servers (4-to-4) (Ipv4 only) Transport inside of VPN VPN inner Protocol Must support IPv6 clients to IPv6 servers (6-to-6) VPN inner Protocol Must support IPv4 clients to IPv4 servers (4-to-4) VPN inner Protocol should support Dual stack. VPN inner Protocol should support 4in6 6in4 (transition protocols) The Idea from wireguard is maybe also a should the external protocol switch from Ipv6 to Ipv4 or Ipv4 to Ipv6 then the inner protocol should stay connected. Protocols with DNS64/NAT64 support would also help. maybe it fist into this recommendation document. -- --- best regards Christian Bretterhofer Enterprise User:

3 2

Minutes from ripe 80
by Jetten Raymond 28 Oct '20

28 Oct '20

Hi, We have published the RIPE 80 minutes as draft here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/active-wg/ipv6/minutes/ipv6-workin… Let me know if these need any changes or corrections. Rgds, Ray

1 0

IPv6 WG @ RIPE81 Agenda
by Jen Linkova 07 Oct '20

07 Oct '20

The agenda for the IPv6 WG session at RIPE81 has been published: https://ripe81.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ipv6-wg/ Thanks to everyone who submitted a talk - this time we got really overbooked so my apologies if your talk was not accepted! See you in 3 weeks! -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: A Look Into the Tor Network Work on Supporting IPv6
by Alun Davies 01 Oct '20

01 Oct '20

Dear colleagues, With support from the RIPE NCC Community Projects Fund 2019, the Tor project has implemented IPv6 support across its network. Read how the work they've done will help make sure users across the RIPE NCC service region will have a more reliable experience on the Tor network: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/tor_grants/a-look-into-the-tor-network-work-o… Kind regards, Alun Davies RIPE NCC

1 0

IPv6 WG@RIPE81: Call for Presentations
by Jen Linkova 18 Sep '20

18 Sep '20

Hello, RIPE81 will be virtual, from Oct 27th till Oct 30th. IPv6 Working Group is tentatively scheduled for Oct 29th, 13:00 - 13:45. We are looking for talks - please email ipv6-wg-chair(a)ripe.net if you'd like to present. Thanks! -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

1 1

[news] The IPv6 Fundamentals – Analyst Exam Is Live
by Sandra Bras 17 Aug '20

17 Aug '20

Dear colleagues, The IPv6 Fundamentals – Analyst exam is now live! You can use your LIR’s vouchers to schedule a RIPE NCC Certified Professionals exam using our online exam platform. The IPv6 Fundamentals - Analyst exam is intended for individuals who are familiar with best current practices in IPv6. It certifies your ability to calculate IPv6 subnets, create an IPv6 addressing plan and recognise the application of IPv6 transition mechanisms, among other skills. We would like to thank the RIPE community members who supported the exam creation process by writing and reviewing questions, and also answering our Job Task Analysis survey. You can find out more about the IPv6 Fundamentals – Analyst badge at: https://www.ripe.net/support/certified-professionals/ipv6-fundamentals-anal… <https://www.ripe.net/support/certified-professionals/ipv6-fundamentals-anal…> As for us here at Learning and Development, we’re getting back to work on our next exam – IPv6 Security Expert, which we expect to launch towards the end of 2020 or early 2021. All the best for the exam! Best regards, Sandra Bras Assistant Manager, Learning and Development RIPE NCC

1 0

IPv6 Exam Guide is Available
by sbras＠ripe.net 04 Aug '20

04 Aug '20

Dear colleagues, We’re putting the finishing touches on the first IPv6 exam in RIPE NCC Certified Professionals – “IPv6 Fundamentals – Analyst”. This exam is intended for people who are familiar with IPv6 best current practices and certifies your ability to calculate IPv6 subnets, create an IPv6 addressing plan, and recognise the application of specific IPv6 transition mechanisms, among other skills. Many of you have already shown interest in this exam. As requested, we’ve made the study guide available in advance so you can start preparing. You can read more about the exam and download the study guide here: https://www.ripe.net/support/certified-professionals/ipv6-fundamentals-anal… We will let you know when exam scheduling is available. Best regards, Sandra Sandra Bras Assistant Manager, Learning and Development RIPE NCC

1 0

Fwd: [v6ops] Question about "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers"
by Fernando Gont 29 Jul '20

29 Jul '20

Folks, FYI. The document is this one: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-04 And the request input should be directed to <v6ops-chairs(a)ietf.org>, following the instructions described bellow. Thanks! Cheers, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [v6ops] Question about "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers" Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 22:55:45 -0700 From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf(a)gmail.com> Reply-To: V6Ops-Chairs <v6ops-chairs(a)ietf.org> To: IPv6 Operations <v6ops(a)ietf.org> It looks like Fernando (et al) revised this and posted draft -04 on Saturday, and there has been a flurry of discussion. I haven't been through the document or the entire thread yet, but I do observe that a number of people have comments, and several people have expressed interest in the document. Let me ask the obvious question: you we want to adopt this as a working group draft? I won't ask you to hum; whether you wish to say "yes", "no", or "abstain", please reply to this email *privately* (which is to say, to v6ops-chairs) with that word prepended on the subject line. I'll give us 48 hours, which is to say that I will evaluate and state the result Thursday evening Pacific time. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&q=%22draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-… https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?qdr=a&q=%22Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers%22 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops "Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension Headers", Fernando Gont, Nick Hilliard, Gert Doering, Warren Kumari, Geoff Huston, 2020-07-25, _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6ops(a)ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

1 0

Join us for the RIPE NCC Educa::IPv6-only
by Ondřej Caletka 08 Jun '20

08 Jun '20

Dear IPv6 working group, You are invited to join us for a deep-dive into an IPv6-only world! We’re hosting the fourth edition of a RIPE NCC::Educa - a one day online event, bringing together experts from around the world to take a deeper look at topics of interest. Registration is free. To mark the anniversary of World IPv6 Launch Day, we’re hosting the RIPE NCC::Educa IPv6-only on Monday, 8 June from 10:00 UTC+2 onwards. Expert presenters will talk about what it means to run IPv6-only data centres, ISPs and enterprises, among other topics. You can view the agenda at: https://www.ripe.net/support/training/ripe-ncc-educa/ripe-ncc-educa-ipv6-20… Register at: https://www.eventbrite.nl/e/ripe-ncceduca-ipv6-only-tickets-106761053184 We hope to see you online soon! Best regards, Ondřej Caletka RIPE NCC

16 43

New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 Adoption Statistics: a Comparison of Different Metrics
by Mirjam Kuehne 08 Jun '20

08 Jun '20

Dear colleagues, In this new article on RIPE Labs we're looking at IPv6 adoption statistics provided by various organisations. How far do they match, and if not, why not? https://labs.ripe.net/Members/wilhelm/ipv6-adoption-statistics-a-comparison… Please note the link to the interactive maps that allow for a quick visual comparison of the results. If you have any feedback or additional information about these results, we welcome input in the comment section below the article. Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC

1 0

Fwd: slaac-renum: New rev of draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt)
by Fernando Gont 19 May '20

19 May '20

Folks, This is one of the documents I presented at the last RIPE IPv6 WG meeting. Thought you might be interested. Thanks! Cheers, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: slaac-renum: New rev of draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt) Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 03:38:18 -0300 From: Fernando Gont <fgont(a)si6networks.com> To: 6man(a)ietf.org <6man(a)ietf.org> Folks, We have posted a revision of draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum. It is available at: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt The main changes incorporated in this version are: * We have eliminated the counter-based algorithm from Section 4.5 Previous revisions of the draft contained two alternative algorithms in Section 4.5: a counter-based algorithm, and a timer-based algorithm. The timer-based algorithm is more robust and simple, so it didn't make sense to keep the counter-based algorithm. (Kudos to Philip Homburg for "pushing" us to improve the algorithm). * Clarified the terminology used in the document This is a rather minor detail. We simply have spelled out that throughout the document, "GUAs" refer to "globally reachable" addresses (as opposed to ULAs). The diff from the last rev is available at: https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt As always, your feedback will be appreciated. Thanks! Cheers, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Version Notification for draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 23:25:39 -0700 From: internet-drafts(a)ietf.org To: Richard Patterson <richard.patterson(a)sky.uk>, Jan Zorz <jan(a)go6.si>, Fernando Gont <fgont(a)si6networks.com> A new version of I-D, draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt has been successfully submitted by Fernando Gont and posted to the IETF repository. Name: draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum Revision: 08 Title: Improving the Robustness of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash Renumbering Events Document date: 2020-05-18 Group: Individual Submission Pages: 24 URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08 Htmlized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-gont-6man-slaac-renum-08 Abstract: In renumbering scenarios where an IPv6 prefix suddenly becomes invalid, hosts on the local network will continue using stale prefixes for an unacceptably long period of time, thus resulting in connectivity problems. This document improves the reaction of IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration to such renumbering scenarios. Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. The IETF Secretariat

1 0

IPv4 Flag Day
by Niall O'Reilly 15 May '20

15 May '20

In https://ripe80.ripe.net/archives/chat/88/ 13:23 < luna> https://ipv4flagday.net/ 13:24 < chrbre_AS206228> https://github.com/ipviolations/ipv4flagday/issues Thanks, Luna and Christian, for pointing me at this, which is a fine idea. I’ve added an issue for false alarm when zone apex has no address record of either kind. Niall

4 5

RIPE 80 IPv6 wg session Wilhelms DSL broke, some unanswered questions
by Jetten Raymond 14 May '20

14 May '20

Hello All, Thank you all for watching the IPv6 WG virtually, at the latest minutes of Wilhelms presentation Q&A his dsl connection unfortunately went down, there were still some questions in the buffer, could you Wilhelm comment yet on these ? Any tips to get app developers on board to develop IPv6 enabled apps? It's not uncommon for companies to exclude IPv6 from minimum viable product as its "too hard" Could disabling SLAAC and better DHCPv6 support (eg in mobile devices) help the deployment? It would help with some migrations from IPv4 to IPv6 I think. (Mark Scholten / asking for myself) Rgds, Ray For Internal Use Only

8 8

Re: [ipv6-wg] RIPE 80 IPv6 wg session Wilhelms DSL broke, some unanswered questions
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 14 May '20

14 May '20

My view on the 2nd one: I think SLAAC is sufficient! I guess unless Android change their mind and develops/enables DHCPv6, this will not be useful. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 14/5/20 13:59, "ipv6-wg en nombre de Jetten Raymond" <ipv6-wg-bounces(a)ripe.net en nombre de raymond.jetten(a)elisa.fi> escribió: Hello All, Thank you all for watching the IPv6 WG virtually, at the latest minutes of Wilhelms presentation Q&A his dsl connection unfortunately went down, there were still some questions in the buffer, could you Wilhelm comment yet on these ? Any tips to get app developers on board to develop IPv6 enabled apps? It’s not uncommon for companies to exclude IPv6 from minimum viable product as its “too hard” Could disabling SLAAC and better DHCPv6 support (eg in mobile devices) help the deployment? It would help with some migrations from IPv4 to IPv6 I think. (Mark Scholten / asking for myself) Rgds, Ray For Internal Use Only ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

1 0

RIPE80 IPv6 WG Session
by Jen Linkova 08 May '20

08 May '20

Dear IPv6 Enthusiasts, The agenda for IPv6 WG at RIPE80 has been published: https://ripe80.ripe.net/programme/meeting-plan/ipv6-wg/ The instructions on how to attend the RIPE80 sessions could be found at https://ripe80.ripe.net/attend/how-to-participate/ See you there! -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry on behalf of IPv6 WG Chairs.

1 0

RIPE80 Call for Presentations
by Jen Linkova 01 May '20

01 May '20

Dear IPv6 Enthusiasts, As you might have noticed, RIPE80 is going to be a virtual meeting. So IPv6 WG is going to meet on Thu, May 14th, 13:00 - 13:45 CEST (Don't forget to convert to your local timezone). We are looking for talks. COVID-19 does not seem to be a reason good enough to slow down IPv6 deployments. I suspect it might be a reason for accelerate them, actually. So stories about 'IPv6 in the Time of Cholera' (or any other talks about IPv6) are appreciated. Please send your suggestions (the title, short summary, how much time you need) to ipv6-wg-chair(a)ripe.net. Thanks, -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry on behalf of IPv6 WG Chairs.

9 11

Fwd: [v6ops] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum
by Fernando Gont 04 Apr '20

04 Apr '20

Hello, folks, v6ops is WGLC'ing one of the documents (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum-01) we have authored to improve the reaction of SLAAC to renumbering events. This document contains recommendations for Customer Edge Routers. For background, you may want to consult: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-slaac-renum-01 If you have any comments/feedback, please do let us know. If possible, on the v6ops list (https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops) Thanks! Cheers, Fernando -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [v6ops] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 15:47:14 +0000 From: Ron Bonica <rbonica=40juniper.net(a)dmarc.ietf.org> To: v6ops(a)ietf.org <v6ops(a)ietf.org> Folks, This message initiates a WG Last Call on draft-ietf-v6ops-cpe-slaac-renum. Please submit comments by April 13, 2020. Fred and Ron Juniper Business Use Only -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando(a)gont.com.ar || fgont(a)si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 -- Fernando Gont SI6 Networks e-mail: fgont(a)si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492

3 3

New on RIPE Labs: What’s the Deal with IPv6 Link-Local Addresses?
by Philip Homburg 11 Mar '20

11 Mar '20

Dear colleagues, Stephen Strowes, Emile Aben and I published a new article on RIPE Labs on how link-local addresses in IPv6, and specifically the '%eth0'-part of link-local addresses, can have an impact on RIPE Atlas measurements. https://labs.ripe.net/Members/philip_homburg/whats-the-deal-with-ipv6-link-… We think this will be an interesting read for network operators and others who are using RIPE Atlas measurement data or are interested in IPv6. Kind regards, Philip Homburg RIPE NCC

2 1

Can ripemtg SSID promotes NAT64 (at least) during RIPE80 ? :)
by Willy Manga 28 Feb '20

28 Feb '20

Hello, I was looking the trends of the last FOSDEM [1] and I recalled discussions before and during RIPE79. I humbly think you could give a try ... 1. https://blogs.cisco.com/getyourbuildon/fosdem-2020-trends-and-analysis -- Willy Manga @ongolaboy https://ongola.blogspot.com/

5 4

IPv6 WG Minutes - RIPE 79
by Jetten Raymond 16 Dec '19

16 Dec '19

Hello all, Please find attached the draft minutes from the IPv6 WG session at RIPE 79. Do let us know if you want any changes made to the minutes. If we haven't heard from you by 20 December, we'll assume all is in order and publish the minutes to the website as they are. Rgds, Ray, Jen, Benedikt For Internal Use Only

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: How to Build and Market IPv6-only Services
by Mirjam Kuehne 04 Dec '19

04 Dec '19

Dear colleagues, For those of you who missed Nico Schotteluis' presentation at RIPE 79, here is his story on how they built and marketed IPv6-only services (including cute penguin drawings :-)): https://labs.ripe.net/Members/nico_schottelius/how-to-build-and-market-ipv6… Kind regards, Mirjam Kühne RIPE NCC

1 0