- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa broken
by Daniel Roesen 17 Aug '04

17 Aug '04

On Sat, Aug 14, 2004 at 09:17:56AM +0100, David Malone wrote: > 2.0.0.2.ip6.int has become completely unavailable in the last few > days, resulting in delays for people connecting from 6to4 addresses > via ssh and the like. 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa is also broken in all colors. soa @ns.apnic.net. for ip6.arpa. has serial: 2004071900 soa @ns.icann.org. for ip6.arpa. has serial: 2004071900 soa @ns-sec.ripe.net. for ip6.arpa. has serial: 2004071900 dig @tinnie.arin.net. for SOA of parent (ip6.arpa.) failed ==> tinnie.arin.net IPv6 connectivity is broken: $ dig @69.25.34.195 ip6.arpa. SOA +short dns1.icann.org. hostmaster.icann.org. 2004071900 3600 1800 604800 10800 $ dig @2001:440:2000:1::22 ip6.arpa. SOA ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3 <<>> @2001:440:2000:1::22 ip6.arpa. SOA ;; global options: printcmd ;; connection timed out; no servers could be reached Found 0 NS and 0 glue records for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. @ns.apnic.net. (AUTH) Found 0 NS and 0 glue records for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. @ns.icann.org. (AUTH) Found 4 NS and 4 glue records for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. @ns-sec.ripe.net. (AUTH) DNServers for ip6.arpa. === 3 were also authoritatve for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. === 0 were non-authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. ERROR: Found 2 diff sets of NS records === from servers authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. WARNING: ns.apnic.net. claims to be authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. == but no NS record at parent zone WARNING: ns.icann.org. claims to be authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. == but no NS record at parent zone WARNING: ns-sec.ripe.net. claims to be authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. == but no NS record at parent zone ==> so although the three remaining NS for ip6.arpa have the same SOA serial, they obviously have a different view on the NS RRset for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa... and all are authoritative for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. Now looking at the NS RRset ns-sec.ripe.net returns for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa: == ns-apnic.6to4.nro.net. ns-arin.6to4.nro.net. ns-lacnic.6to4.nro.net. == ns-ripe.6to4.nro.net. soa @ns-apnic.6to4.nro.net. for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. serial: 2004072901 dig @ns-arin.6to4.nro.net. for SOA of 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. failed soa @ns-lacnic.6to4.nro.net. for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. serial: 2004072901 soa @ns-ripe.6to4.nro.net. for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa. serial: 2004072901 ==> ns-arin.6to4.nro.net == tinnie.arin.net, so we have the same IPv6 reachability problem again What a mess all over... why do ns.apnic.net and ns.icann.org return NXDOMAIN when queried for the NS RRset for 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa, but ns-sec.ripe.net returning one? It looks like the whole 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa is missing in the ip6.arpa zone, and ns-sec.ripe.net is only by chance carrying the 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa zone, thus returning the NS RRset. I wonder where's the right place to report such global (multi-RIR/org) DNS problems to, if not v6ops. I see no "global IPv6 operations" list, can anyone enlighten me? Best regards, Daniel

2 4

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [address-policy-wg] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
by Daniel Roesen 13 Aug '04

13 Aug '04

On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 09:04:21AM +0100, Jon Lawrence wrote: > Yes, doubling does seem unwise. > It would make sense (to me anyway) that once xx% of a /12 is allocated then > another /12 is issued to the RIR. Indeed. I see no point in unconditional doubling. I'm pretty confident that /12 blocks are large enough to serve a RIR long enough so that ordering a new /12 is not hampering anything. My suggestion would be to set aside a /8 per RIR (perhaps also a DNS reverse delegation for that) and allocate /12s to the RIRs upon their request. A RIR qualifies for a new /12 block as soon as nn% usage of the current /12 block is reached. nn might be 50% or more. As Randy suggests, the percentage should be low enough so that the RIRs can get new space without delaying allocation to LIRs (as it happens nowadays). Best regards, Daniel

3 2

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs
by leo vegoda 10 Aug '04

10 Aug '04

Dear Colleagues, The Number Resource Organisation (NRO) has published a proposal for a policy for the allocation of IPv6 address space from the IANA to the RIRs. It is intended that this proposed policy should be agreed by all RIRs' open policy fora and then approved by the ASO and ICANN as a global policy. The proposal is available on our web site at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/ipv6.html Comment on the proposal is sought. Kind regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

9 15

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] inet6num missing for allocation - more?
by Daniel Roesen 04 Aug '04

04 Aug '04

Hi, I've just noticed, that the allocation 2001:478::/32 is not registered in the RIPE DB: $ whois -h whois.ripe.net -r 2001:478::/32 | fgrep inet6num: inet6num: 0::/0 Could RIPE check wether this problem does exist for other allocations too? Or is EP.NET "special"? :-) Best regards, Daniel

2 2

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] inet6num missing for allocation - more?
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 04 Aug '04

04 Aug '04

>I've just noticed, that the allocation 2001:478::/32 is not registered >in the RIPE DB: But it is in ARIN's: > warin 2001:478:: OrgName: EP.NET, LLC. OrgID: V6EP Address: PO 12317 City: Marina del Rey StateProv: CA PostalCode: 90295 Country: US NetRange: 2001:0478:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000 - 2001:0478:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF CIDR: 2001:0478:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000:0000/32 NetName: EP-NET NetHandle: EP-NET-NET Parent: ARIN-001-NET NetType: Direct Allocation NameServer: FLAG.EP.NET NameServer: Z.IP6.INT Comment: RegDate: 2001-05-21 Updated: 2002-08-05 TechHandle: WM110-ARIN TechName: Manning, Bill TechPhone: +1-310-322-8102 TechEmail: bmanning(a)karoshi.com > ... Or is EP.NET "special"? :-) Who knows :-) >Best regards, >Daniel Wilfried ( https://cert.aco.net/ ) _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RE: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
by Bound, Jim 31 Jul '04

31 Jul '04

Thank you. /jim > -----Original Message----- > From: bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com > [mailto:bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 7:20 AM > To: Bound, Jim > Cc: bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com; Jeroen Massar; Anand > Kumria; Rob Blokzijl; v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org; sig-ipv6(a)apnic.net; > ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: > 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?) > > > both ip6.arpa and ip6.int > > --bill > > > > > P.S. Bill - the new initial IPv6 AAA at root for JP and KR > are they to > > use ipv6.arpa? Thanks. > > > > /jim > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org > > > [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of > > > bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com > > > Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 5:45 PM > > > To: Jeroen Massar > > > Cc: Anand Kumria; Rob Blokzijl; v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org; > > > sig-ipv6(a)apnic.net; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > > > Subject: Re: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: > > > 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?) > > > > > > > > > whjile i applaud each and everyone who has expunged > > > all ip6.int from their lives, the fact of the matter is that > > > IETF fiat or no, there exist -many- systems that can only use > > > reverse maps in the ip6.int tree. > > > > > > it will be maintained as long as there are queries for > > > it. for those of you for whom ip6.int is a distant memory, > > > pleae understand and respect the fact that you can not, > > > despite public posturing, force others to change their > > > systems. to practically remove ip6.int incures real cost > > > in both time and cash. in the US there is a term for what > > > the IETF is trying to do w/ ip6.int. Its called an unfunded > > > mandate. Unless or until the good folk in the IETF who are > > > calling for the removal of ip6.int are ready to put up the > > > cash to effect real change, I wish they would stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 09:58, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2004-07-22, at 09.43, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But indeed, if there is concensus or not 9/9/2004 > > > and ip6.int > > > > > > > > is gone for me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I vote for 9/9/2004 and getting rid of it properly. > > > Maintaining > > > > > > > two reverse threes will create more problems than it > > > will solve. > > > > > > > > > > What, specifically, is the hurry? > > > > > > > > That this has been overdue for three years already and > that even > > > > though the deprecation was marked in August 2001 some vendors > > > > still not have done the change. And as it is a > > > s/ip6.int/ip6.arpa/g which is > > > > very easy, if vendors did not do that yet they are way > > > overdue and you > > > > got to wonder how much their interest is in keeping > > > software upto date. > > > > > > > > Basically we (at least me) have been waiting for the 6bone > > > to get the > > > > delegation so that we could remove the 2 trees and only > keep one: > > > > ip6.arpa. This was decided by the IAB thus we should > live up to it. > > > > > > > > If we do not remove ip6.int then still implementations > > > using it will > > > > not show up. They have had 3 years already to update... > > > > > > > > > > Take your pick: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > > > removal-00.html > > > > > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > > > removal-00.txt > > > > > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > > > removal-00.xml > > > > > > > > > > > > Short, quick and easy. > > > > > > If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit > > > this as an ID. > > > > > > > > > > Comments: > > > > > e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa was documented in RFC3681 > published in February > > > > > 2004 and actioned in July 2004. > > > > > > > > Added, but note that this was all long overdue and > there where a > > > > number of other solutions that would have worked already 2 > > > years ago > > > > if there had not been any of the political arguments > > > holding back this > > > > technical issue. Note also that 6bone will end per 6/6/6 > > > and that it is a TESTbed. > > > > The TESTbed is delaying and thus hurting the production > networks > > > > in this case. > > > > > > > > > I'm assuming the actioning of e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa > is the trigger > > > > > for this I-D; if so, why do you want to wait so > little time (2 > > > > > months) between e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa becoming available and > > > > > requiring people to have updated resolver libraries? > > > > > > > > People should have updated their resolvers in the last > *3 years*. > > > > If you have not done that already then you are not maintaining > > > > your machines properly and there is a big chance that you have > > > > bigger problems than a IPv6 reverse DNS that doesn't > work anymore > > > > because ip6.int is gone. > > > > > > > > > Personally I'd be more in favour of a 6 month > timeout - i.e > > > > > around last December or so. > > > > > > > > Of course the date is up to discussion, but IMHO: ASAP and at > > > > least before the end of the year, the sooner the better. > > > > > > > > Note that Cisco's IOS updates will be done before that date and > > > > Windows > > > > XP2 will come out in August (they say) thus everybody using > > > IPv6 has > > > > time enough to upgrade. All "free unix flavors" already > support it > > > > > > > > Also users agree: http://www.sixxs.net/forum/?msg=general-83948 > > > > Note the begin date of that thread, we where really waiting > > > for 6bone > > > > just as being nice to the people still using it. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 10:57, Rob Blokzijl wrote: > > > > > > > > > > If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit > > > this as an ID. > > > > > > > > > > two minor points. In the abstract and the > > > introduction you write: > > > > > > > > > > RFC 3152 delegates IP6.ARPA for reverse IPv6 > > > delegations. For RIRs > > > > > (RIPE,ARIN,APNIC,LACNIC and soon AFNIC) > > > > > > > > > > Replace RIPE --> RIPE NCC > > > > > > > > That I did that wrong is a major oops, I should by know the > > > difference by now. > > > > > > > > > Replace AFNIC --> AFRINIC > > > > > > > > > > (AFNIC is the .fr registry :-) ) > > > > > > > > Also adjusted and added some xref's in the XML. > > > > > > > > Old version is now draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.a > > > new version > > > > carries the draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00 name. > > > > > > > > Greets, > > > > Jeroen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * sig-ipv6: APNIC SIG on IPv6 technology and > > > policy issues * > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > sig-ipv6 mailing list > > > > sig-ipv6(a)lists.apnic.net > > > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-ipv6 > > > > > > > > > >

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RE: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?)
by Bound, Jim 28 Jul '04

28 Jul '04

Well stated Mr. Manning. Same for any updates from IETF for IPv6 (e.g. 2461, 2462, SEND, Optimistic DAD) as every vendor I know (e.g. routers, switches, servers, clients, embedded systems) is shipping production IPv6 within their OS release. Any changes now to IPv6 will undergo rigorous Q&A, whether it has a business case for deployment to update the OS IPv6 features vs. other work for network centricity within the stack, and general time to test interoperability. Because the freeware BSD and Linux bases do it does not mean that the vendors will do it. Assume the time to change as it is for IPv4 now when we update or add features. The IETF can only provide specifications and suggestions (INFO and BCP) to the market they cannot mandate anything to the market and we have not for IPv4 either, it will not be different than IPv6. This is also dilemma we face for transition mechanisms. Back when we decided to follow the path that we do scenarios and then analysis and killed the forward progress and work on Teredo, ISATAP, DSTM, and Tunnel Broker some vendors and systems software entities did not stop building them and they are now beginning to be deployed in test beds and some early adopters. This will find market interest and into vendor products (note all of the ones listed above) and then when we do finish the specs we will face the same problem with the transition mechanisms. We do need to move to ipv6.arpa in the industry but it will happen gradually and same as a note even for the updates to Base Transition Mechanisms ergo RFC 2893 and I have already run into being asked about IPv4 Compatible Addresses during deployment and those are dead now. Same for the addressing architecture regarding TLAs and Site-Locals. Lesson here is again assume a time to absorb for IPv6 products now just like we do for IPv4. The IPv6 Forum and NAv6TF can help here where the IETF cannot, and I will take this to the members and industry, but it will take time. It is a deployment issue not a standards issue at this point. The exception has been Mobile IPv6 and most vendors are all at RFC level and that is because lots of customers want to begin early adoption with MIPv6 and that keeps the vendors quite proactive on that one. P.S. Bill - the new initial IPv6 AAA at root for JP and KR are they to use ipv6.arpa? Thanks. /jim > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org > [mailto:owner-v6ops@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of > bmanning(a)vacation.karoshi.com > Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 5:45 PM > To: Jeroen Massar > Cc: Anand Kumria; Rob Blokzijl; v6ops(a)ops.ietf.org; > sig-ipv6(a)apnic.net; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [sig-ipv6] Re: 9/9/2004 IP6.INT Removal (Was: > 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?) > > > whjile i applaud each and everyone who has expunged > all ip6.int from their lives, the fact of the matter is that > IETF fiat or no, there exist -many- systems that can only use > reverse maps in the ip6.int tree. > > it will be maintained as long as there are queries for > it. for those of you for whom ip6.int is a distant memory, > pleae understand and respect the fact that you can not, > despite public posturing, force others to change their > systems. to practically remove ip6.int incures real cost > in both time and cash. in the US there is a term for what > the IETF is trying to do w/ ip6.int. Its called an unfunded > mandate. Unless or until the good folk in the IETF who are > calling for the removal of ip6.int are ready to put up the > cash to effect real change, I wish they would stop. > > > > > > On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 09:58, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 2004-07-22, at 09.43, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > But indeed, if there is concensus or not 9/9/2004 > and ip6.int > > > > > > is gone for me. > > > > > > > > > > I vote for 9/9/2004 and getting rid of it properly. > Maintaining > > > > > two reverse threes will create more problems than it > will solve. > > > > > > What, specifically, is the hurry? > > > > That this has been overdue for three years already and that even > > though the deprecation was marked in August 2001 some vendors still > > not have done the change. And as it is a > s/ip6.int/ip6.arpa/g which is > > very easy, if vendors did not do that yet they are way > overdue and you > > got to wonder how much their interest is in keeping > software upto date. > > > > Basically we (at least me) have been waiting for the 6bone > to get the > > delegation so that we could remove the 2 trees and only keep one: > > ip6.arpa. This was decided by the IAB thus we should live up to it. > > > > If we do not remove ip6.int then still implementations > using it will > > not show up. They have had 3 years already to update... > > > > > > Take your pick: > > > > > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > removal-00.html > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > removal-00.txt > > > > > http://unfix.org/~jeroen/archive/drafts/draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int- > > > > removal-00.xml > > > > > > > > Short, quick and easy. > > > > If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit > this as an ID. > > > > > > Comments: > > > e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa was documented in RFC3681 published in February > > > 2004 and actioned in July 2004. > > > > Added, but note that this was all long overdue and there where a > > number of other solutions that would have worked already 2 > years ago > > if there had not been any of the political arguments > holding back this > > technical issue. Note also that 6bone will end per 6/6/6 > and that it is a TESTbed. > > The TESTbed is delaying and thus hurting the production networks in > > this case. > > > > > I'm assuming the actioning of e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa is the trigger > > > for this I-D; if so, why do you want to wait so little time (2 > > > months) between e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa becoming available and > > > requiring people to have updated resolver libraries? > > > > People should have updated their resolvers in the last *3 years*. > > If you have not done that already then you are not maintaining your > > machines properly and there is a big chance that you have bigger > > problems than a IPv6 reverse DNS that doesn't work anymore because > > ip6.int is gone. > > > > > Personally I'd be more in favour of a 6 month timeout - i.e > > > around last December or so. > > > > Of course the date is up to discussion, but IMHO: ASAP and at least > > before the end of the year, the sooner the better. > > > > Note that Cisco's IOS updates will be done before that date and > > Windows > > XP2 will come out in August (they say) thus everybody using > IPv6 has > > time enough to upgrade. All "free unix flavors" already support it > > > > Also users agree: http://www.sixxs.net/forum/?msg=general-83948 > > Note the begin date of that thread, we where really waiting > for 6bone > > just as being nice to the people still using it. > > > > On Thu, 2004-07-22 at 10:57, Rob Blokzijl wrote: > > > > > > If no comments are risen for 16:00 today I'll submit > this as an ID. > > > > > > two minor points. In the abstract and the > introduction you write: > > > > > > RFC 3152 delegates IP6.ARPA for reverse IPv6 > delegations. For RIRs > > > (RIPE,ARIN,APNIC,LACNIC and soon AFNIC) > > > > > > Replace RIPE --> RIPE NCC > > > > That I did that wrong is a major oops, I should by know the > difference by now. > > > > > Replace AFNIC --> AFRINIC > > > > > > (AFNIC is the .fr registry :-) ) > > > > Also adjusted and added some xref's in the XML. > > > > Old version is now draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00.a > new version > > carries the draft-massar-v6ops-ip6int-removal-00 name. > > > > Greets, > > Jeroen > > > > > > > * sig-ipv6: APNIC SIG on IPv6 technology and > policy issues * > > _______________________________________________ > > sig-ipv6 mailing list > > sig-ipv6(a)lists.apnic.net > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-ipv6 > > >

3 2

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?
by Jeroen Massar 26 Jul '04

26 Jul '04

Hi, As e.f.f.3.ip6.arpa has finally been delegated and works as of today I want to propose the end-day for ip6.int. ip6.int has been deprecated in favor of ip6.arpa for almost 3 years already (RFC3152 dates August 2001) thus it is time to clean up the mess. Vendors have been able to update their stacks for almost 3 years, ip6.arpa has been deployed on production (read RIR) IPv6 space already for quite some time too. Thus now, with 6bone also having a working ip6.arpa tree this seems to be a perfect opportunity to start shutting down ip6.int. At the moment only Cisco IOS and Windows XP don't have ip6.arpa support, but IOS has been addressed (they say) and Windows XP will be fixed with SP2 due out per August. As neither of these are server OS's this doesn't pose much of a problem anyway. People using IPv6 need to keep their systems up-to-date anyways. I propose that RIPE, and actually any other RIR, stops any delegations for ip6.int per 9/9/2006. Which is more than 3 years after the RFC has been released. Greets, Jeroen

17 34

Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] 9/9/2006 : ip6.int shutdown?
by Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet 22 Jul '04

22 Jul '04

>Blame the IAB. Apparently, they were the ones who created this mess by >frivolously adopting ip6.arpa as a replacement for ip6.int. I think that's not exactly true ;-) . The reverse name tree for IPv4 is already located in the arpa. subtree. I cannot see any good reason why the same service for IPv6 should use a different TLD. (Actually I don't see a good formal reason for not using in-addr.arpa. - but I presume that there are good technical reasons...) . The mandate of the int. TLD (to support international treaty organisations) is not exactly compatible with the use for IPv6 reverse name tree delegations :-) Wilfried ( https://cert.aco.net/ ) _________________________________:_____________________________________ Wilfried Woeber : e-mail: Woeber(a)CC.UniVie.ac.at UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33 Universitaetsstrasse 7 : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140 A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] Re: Re: IPv6 glue AAAA RRs in the root zone
by Jeroen Massar 21 Jul '04

21 Jul '04

[Added CC to ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net, where IMHO this belongs ;) ] On Wed, 2004-07-21 at 11:11, Jim Reid wrote: > >>>>> "Jeroen" == Jeroen Massar <jeroen(a)unfix.org> writes: > > >> Wrong, several root name servers (of course, not ICANN's one) > >> are reachable over IPv6: read http://www.root-servers.org/ > >> and edit your db.root. > > Jeroen> I know those addresses and I also know that all of those > Jeroen> boxes have a latency over at least 200ms and very odd > Jeroen> routability and those are far far far from to be called > Jeroen> production. > > This could be a good topic for presenting to the WG. Want to volunteer > to write up a document and/or presentation on the state of IPv6 > deployment in the root and TLD name servers, routing anomalies, etc, > etc? It would be good to hear someone's first-hand experiences with > this stuff: what went wrong, how it was worked around or solved, what > could be done better, future directions. Check http://www.sixxs.net/misc/latency/ and select the "IPv6 between POPs and well known destinations" option to reveal some ugglyness. I've been monitoring most of them for quite some time already and I also did some testing with the IPv6 only test root's (see http://www.rs.net) The POPs mentioned btw are the located all over Europe at various independent ISP's add .sixxs.net to find out exactly where or see the POP page on the site. Average latency to b.root-servers.net at least 294ms. H.root-servers.net was gone for sunday to monday and so on.... Not even minding the packetloss. E and I are also there btw, though that is not on the root-servers.org site. > Personally, I don't see why you care about the RTT to a root server. A > well-behaved name server will make 4-5 queries to a root server once a > week or so. <SNIP> That is indeed true, but it is rather odd when a machine is physically close and good connectivity between for instance Amsterdam and Sweden exists and then one still has traffic going over the US... But this is more a problem of the state of the IPv6 routing tables and the fact that only I is in europe and is only even testing IPv6 connectivity. Thus a presentation or better a debate about how the IPv6 routing can be improved in general would be a better subject and prolly the place for that is the ipv6-wg. But as people know who go there Gert Doering has been doing those updates for quite some time already and last time at least there was some discussion about the MIPP draft. Even as it has improved considerably in the last couple of years we are not there yet.. Greets, Jeroen

1 0

Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC
by Doug Barton 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

Johan Ihren wrote: > Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis(a)kurtis.pp.se> writes: > > >>>I guess if the RFC is there is because IANA requires it, so moving >>>this to historic will not work, instead updating it will do. >> >>Help me out here. Why would IANA require it? I don't remember there >>being an RFC telling IANA how to allocate other resources? What's so >>special about IPv6 addresses? > > > The lesson learned here is that IANA allocation policy based on > numbers specified in an RFC caused problems once. Then updating the > RFC to get around the problem is broken. That's just pushing the > problem out of sight with a clear promise of it coming back to bite us > sometime in the future. > > Moving the RFC to historic is one half of the solution. The other half > is IANA standing on their own legs (together with the NRO) on these > matters. Thank you for including me in this discussion. Rather than attempting to correct details of the history described in this thread (and which even if I was right it wouldn't matter too much since they happened before I took my current position in December of 2003) I would like to suggest a way forward. The current membership of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) has expressed an interest in the direction in which IPv6 allocation policy proceeds. ICANN thinks that this interest is perfectly reasonable, and welcomes it, as well as their valuable insight on the relevant issues. My position on this issue has been clearly stated on numerous occasions going back to January of this year. It is not IANA's job to create policy. We will however be glad to participate in a discussion that is designed to lead to a policy, offering our unique perspective. An excellent example of how this process probably should work is the IPv4 global allocation policy that was developed in cooperation between the RIRs and IANA back in July 2003. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/draft-documents/iana-rir-allocation-policies.html That policy subsequently went through the policy fora in all 4 regions, and is currently awaiting finalization through the ASO process. A similar process needs to occur in relationship to IPv6 allocation policy on a global level. ICANN and the IAB stand ready to enter into such discussions, and eagerly await such an invitation from the RIRs. Between now and the time that such a policy is created, IANA's position is that it is not appropriate for us to attempt to be "creative" in this area. Doug -- Doug Barton General Manager, The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority

3 2

Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC
by Gert Doering 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

Hi, On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 05:33:41AM -0700, william(at)elan.net wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 02:18:01PM +0200, leo vegoda wrote: > > > The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2001:4000::/23 > > > from the IANA in June 2004. > > Unbelievable. Morons. > Why? Because man-months of argueing that "/23 allocations are needlessly fragmenting the RIR address blocks, please allocate a decent size (like a /8)" are just plainly ignored by the ICANN folks. See the RIPE-IPv6 mailing list archives. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 60210 (58081) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster(a)Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299

11 19

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 Assignment to Customers
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

Hi all, I guess this is interesting for this group ... Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 Assignment to Customers (http://www.ist-ipv6.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6…) I drafted this document during the last RIPE meeting and asked for inputs, but nothing .... Inputs still welcome ! Regards, Jordi ********************************** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line 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.

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC
by leo vegoda 14 Jun '04

14 Jun '04

Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2001:4000::/23 from the IANA in June 2004. 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/smallest-alloc-sizes.html> Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ICANN Board to implement IPv6 in root servers
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 30 May '04

30 May '04

http://www.ist-ipv6.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=5… ********************************** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line 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.

6 13

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RIRs and IPv6 Groups Pledge Support of Global IPv6 Deployment
by Paul Rendek 12 May '04

12 May '04

Dear Colleagues, The RIRs, the IPv6 Task Forces, and the IPv6 Forum have issued a joint press release detailing co-operative efforts in support of global IPv6 deployment. The press release is available on the RIPE NCC website at: http://www.ripe.net/ipv6/ipv6-support-20040512.html Regards, Paul Rendek Head of Member Services and Communications RIPE NCC

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] The Regional Internet Registries, IPv6 Task Forces and IPv6 Forum Pledge Co-operative Support of Global IPv6 Deployment and new big allocation to TeliaSonera
by JORDI PALET MARTINEZ 12 May '04

12 May '04

Not sure why this email doesn't go thru, just trying again ... Hi all, See below my previous email to other exploders. I believe is specially important for this WG to provide inputs regarding concrete actions, so please, repeating myself, let me know !. Also, the slides regarding the big allocations had been updated with the last week Telia inputs (published only since today with their consent). By the way, in case you aren't aware of, the site http://www.ist-ipv6.org publish news (as many as we can) about IPv6, you can register there to receive a weekly update also. Regards, Jordi *** Hi all, Please, see the very recent news below. Regarding the cooperation with the RIRs, it will be helpful to get ideas and inputs from all the involved communities in order to concrete actions, so let me know ! Regional Internet Registries, IPv6 Task Forces and IPv6 Forum Pledge Cooperative Support of Global IPv6 Deployment http://www.ist-ipv6.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=5… TeliaSonera receives /20, the bigger IPv6 block up to now http://www.ist-ipv6.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=5… Regards, Jordi ********************************** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line 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.

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RE: [6bone] /20 allocated - update your BGP filters!
by Jason Everard 12 May '04

12 May '04

Hi Gert, Having lived in Europe for most of my life, EU is not a country, rather a collection of countries. I'm not sure if it is just standard practice to list the European country under "EU", but wouldn't it be better to have "ES" for Espania? Just being picky. Kind regards, Jason Everard SANS Certified, CISSP, CCIE Security Senior Technical Consultant Network & Security Design Telecom Advanced Solutions Telecom New Zealand Tel: +64-9-363-3002 ext: 93002 Mobile: +64-27-478-3931 -----Original Message----- From: 6bone-bounces(a)mailman.isi.edu [mailto:6bone-bounces@mailman.isi.edu] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Tuesday, 11 May 2004 3:57 a.m. To: 6bone(a)ISI.EDU; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: [6bone] /20 allocated - update your BGP filters! Hi, the first IPv6 /20 allocation ever has been made today: inet6num: 2001:2000::/20 netname: EU-TELIANET-20040510 org: ORG-TIC2-RIPE descr: PROVIDER Local Registry descr: TeliaSonera AB country: EU and this means that "if you have been following my filtering recommendations, this network will not be accepted right now" (the current filters had a minimum accepted prefix length of a /24). I have updated the prefix filter recommendation page: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html and urge you to check whether your filters are prepared for these large prefixes. (There is a /23 upcoming, and rumors speak of a /19 being requested "real soon now"). TODO: the "strict" filter could do some grouping for different IPv6 allocation ranges, but this is dangerous today, as we don't know how future allocations will look like. Note: ICANN just doesn't get it. They have not allocated a reasonable prefix size to RIPE (like a /8), not even a /19, but "a big chunk of 14 sucessive /23s, summing up to a /20+/21+/22" - see the list at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-tla-assignments Gert Doering -- RIPE Address Policy WG Co-Chair, keeper of the IPv6 filter list -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 60210 (58081) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster(a)Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 _______________________________________________ 6bone mailing list 6bone(a)mailman.isi.edu http://mailman.isi.edu/mailman/listinfo/6bone ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that this communication does not designate an information system for the purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9 18

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] [ginny@arin.net: [arin-announce] ARIN Offers Expanded IPv6 Network Services]
by David Kessens 11 May '04

11 May '04

----- Forwarded message from Ginny Listman <ginny(a)arin.net> ----- Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 15:29:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Ginny Listman <ginny(a)arin.net> To: arin-announce(a)arin.net Subject: [arin-announce] ARIN Offers Expanded IPv6 Network Services ARIN announces further introduction of its IPv6 network services. These services include DNS, FTP, HTTP and WHOIS via port 80. Additional services, such as WHOIS via port 43 and HTTPS will be added in the future. Details of some of the v6 implementation issues ARIN encountered will be presented during a panel discussion at the upcoming NANOG 31 meeting. Please feel free to contact me at ginny(a)arin.net if you have any questions. Regards, Ginny Listman Director of Engineering American Registry for Internet Numbers ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] /20 allocated - update your BGP filters!
by Gert Doering 10 May '04

10 May '04

Hi, the first IPv6 /20 allocation ever has been made today: inet6num: 2001:2000::/20 netname: EU-TELIANET-20040510 org: ORG-TIC2-RIPE descr: PROVIDER Local Registry descr: TeliaSonera AB country: EU and this means that "if you have been following my filtering recommendations, this network will not be accepted right now" (the current filters had a minimum accepted prefix length of a /24). I have updated the prefix filter recommendation page: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html and urge you to check whether your filters are prepared for these large prefixes. (There is a /23 upcoming, and rumors speak of a /19 being requested "real soon now"). TODO: the "strict" filter could do some grouping for different IPv6 allocation ranges, but this is dangerous today, as we don't know how future allocations will look like. Note: ICANN just doesn't get it. They have not allocated a reasonable prefix size to RIPE (like a /8), not even a /19, but "a big chunk of 14 sucessive /23s, summing up to a /20+/21+/22" - see the list at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-tla-assignments Gert Doering -- RIPE Address Policy WG Co-Chair, keeper of the IPv6 filter list -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 60210 (58081) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster(a)Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Agenda for ipv6 wg RIPE48 (update 2)
by David Kessens 05 May '04

05 May '04

Hi, Below follows an updated agenda (update 2) for the ipv6 wg for RIPE48. Thanks, David Kessens --- Updated agenda (update 2) for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE48 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday May 5, 2004 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. "per country view" about IPv6 allocation on the RIPE/NCC http://www.ip6.fccn.pt/v6top.html (Carlos Friacas) 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. Raising RPSLng Awareness (Carlos Friacas, Simon Leinen and Joao Damas) F. Discussion of: http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt -- break -- G. IETF multi6 update (Kurtis Erik Lindqvist) H. Latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli) (we might cover this topic before the break) I. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? (Jordi Palet Martinez for Vodafoon) J. IPv6 home automation (Jordi Palet Martinez) K. (brief) update from the RIPE NCC on ipv6 enabled services (Andrei Robachevsky) L. IPv6 network management (IETF MIBs status, NetFlow v9, SNMPv6, and monitoring tools are the agenda items). (Bernard Tuy) M. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) N. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Actual IPv6 traffic
by Iljitsch van Beijnum 04 May '04

04 May '04

From the agenda: > C. 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) My input in advance: I've been running some web measurements using a small image that can be linked on web pages to see whether the visitors are v6-capable or not. (The host that has the image has an IPv6 address and notes whether the image is requested over v4 or v6.) The results over the past months: Site IPv4 IPv6 Total 0 151 ( 98.05%) 3 ( 1.95%) 154 3 334 ( 94.35%) 20 ( 5.65%) 354 6 1355 ( 82.02%) 297 ( 17.98%) 1652 7 57 ( 75.00%) 19 ( 25.00%) 76 8 20107 ( 99.85%) 31 ( 0.15%) 20138 10 2918 ( 84.43%) 538 ( 15.57%) 3456 Totals 24925 ( 96.49%) 908 ( 3.51%) 25833 Note that the numbers refer to different sites with very different usage and IPv6 interest levels. Only number 8 is a very mainstream non-networking site (in Dutch) so I think this one represents average IPv6 capability for the web surfing public fairly well, at around 1 user in 666 requesting the counter image over IPv6. :-) See http://www.muada.com/ to see the counter in action and for a link to the results page. (BTW, it would help if someone would type sysctl -w net.inet6.ip6.forwarding=1 on router.ripemtg.ripe.net, or, failing that, kill the rtadvd.)

3 2

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Agenda for ipv6 wg RIPE48 (updated)
by David Kessens 03 May '04

03 May '04

Below follows an updated agenda for the ipv6 wg for RIPE48. I managed to find a a volunteer for: What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations? (more volunteers are welcome) I also changed the scheduling to accomodate some of our speakers. We probably still have some time left so I will allow last minute additions to the agenda. Please read: http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt so we can discuss this document. Thanks, David Kessens --- Updated agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE48 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday May 5, 2004 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. 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) D. Raising RPSLng awareness (Carlos Friacas, Simon Leinen and Joao Damas) E. Discussion of: http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt -- break -- G. Latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli) (we might cover this topic before the break) H. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? (Jordi Palet Martinez for Vodafoon) I. IPv6 home automation (Jordi Palet Martinez) J. (brief) update from the RIPE NCC on ipv6 enabled services (tentative) K. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) L. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Agenda for ipv6 working group RIPE48
by David Kessens 29 Apr '04

29 Apr '04

Below follows the agenda for the ipv6 wg for RIPE48. As you can see, we have a long agenda slot this time since we got many comments from people that we need more time. As a result, we still have some time left so I will accept last minute additions to the agenda. I have not found any volunteers for one proposed agenda item: What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations? I would very much welcome presentations from the receivers of such space on what their plans are on what they will do with this address space. Please let me know if you can help out or happen to know somebody who can help. Thanks, David Kessens --- Agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE48 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday May 5, 2004 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. 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) D. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? (looking for speakers) E. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) F. Latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli) G. Raising RPSLng Awareness (Carlos Friacas, Simon Leinen and Joao Damas) -- break -- H. IPv6 home automation (Jordi Palet Martinez) I. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Call for agenda items & draft agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE48
by David Kessens 20 Apr '04

20 Apr '04

Below follows the draft agenda (v1) for the ipv6 wg for RIPE48. As you can see, we have a long agenda slot this time since we got many comments from people that we needed more time. Please contact me if you would like to propose any agenda items. I would like to draw your attention to one proposed agenda item: What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations? More recently, we have seen several ipv6 allocations that are larger than the minimum size. I would very much welcome presentations from the receivers of such space on what their plans are on what they will do with this address space. Thanks, David Kessens --- Draft Agenda (v1) for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE48 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday May 5, 2004 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. 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) D. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? (looking for speakers) E. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) F. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Configuration in IP networks
by Savitha Kumar 08 Apr '04

08 Apr '04

Hi, I was wondering about how nodes (hosts/routers) configures in an IP network. Do they use NMS or EMS to do this? I was also thinking about how all this would be done for IPv6 networks. Especially in the context that it supports auto-configuration. If anybody knows anything about this, can you please share your thoughts? Thanks a lot! Savitha ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner online. http://yahoo.shaadi.com/india-matrimony/

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 traffic measurement
by Savitha Kumar 23 Mar '04

23 Mar '04

Hi, Is there any activity going on to measure IPv6 traffic? If anybody is working on it, can you please share what tools are you using? I'm basically looking for an accounting tool which could recognize IPv6 packets and addresses. I got this tool called NeTraMet. Does anybody has any experience in using this tool for IPv6? Thanks, Savitha ________________________________________________________________________ Yahoo! India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best policies, services, tools and more. Go to: http://in.insurance.yahoo.com/licspecial/index.html

4 8

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 traffic measurement
by matthew.ford＠bt.com 10 Mar '04

10 Mar '04

Note that this document doesn't mention ntop (www.ntop.org) which now supports IPv6 in CVS and can be used as an open-source alternative to Cisco's netflow. Mat > -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin@ripe.net] > On Behalf Of Tim Chown > Sent: 09 March 2004 07:53 > To: ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] IPv6 traffic measurement > > Hi, > > Have a look at this 6NET project document: > > http://www.6net.org/publications/deliverables/D6.2.3v2.pdf > > Tim > > On Tue, Mar 09, 2004 at 05:09:03AM +0000, Savitha Kumar wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Is there any activity going on to measure IPv6 traffic? If > anybody is > > working on it, can you please share what tools are you using? > > > > I'm basically looking for an accounting tool which could recognize > > IPv6 packets and addresses. > > > > I got this tool called NeTraMet. Does anybody has any experience in > > using this tool for IPv6? > > > > Thanks, > > Savitha > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > __ Yahoo! India Insurance Special: Be informed on the best > policies, > > services, tools and more. > > Go to: http://in.insurance.yahoo.com/licspecial/index.html > >

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Apologises
by Bernard Tuy 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

====BT: David and all, Since a couple of people were surpised to see me at the meeting although I didn't show up in the ipv6 wg, I feel I have to give some explanations. My yesterday morning flight was cancelled and I had to book for another one 3 hours later. Then when the ipv6 wg meets I was about to land in Schipol airport.... It seems that in some european countries 5 cm of snow is enough to completely mess airway traffic. I'm pretty sure it must appear weird to people from countries where most of the airports are under the snow several months a year ... but that's it. So sorry not to be able to attend the meeting since I'd have like to be able to hear lot of intersting topics schedulded on the agenda and to have the possibility to present what I'd prepared. The consolation is I probably wouldn't have been able to fit my 26 slides in 10-15 mn. So may I require a half an hour slot for the next meeting in May ? See you on the mailing list -or at Krasnapolski until friday noon... Cheers, +Bernard T.

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Minutes for the ipv6 wg session RIPE46
by David Kessens 19 Jan '04

19 Jan '04

Hi, We didn't receive any comments on the minutes in the comment period so the draft minutes (v1) are now declared final. Please see below for the minutes of the ipv6 wg session at RIPE46. I hope this helps, David K. --- Minutes for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE46 When: 16:00 - 17:30, Wednesday September 3, 2003 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam Who: Chair: David Kessens Scribe: Pierre Baume A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe: Pierre Baume (RIPE NCC) - agenda bashing http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) Agenda point D below dropped. B. Status of the 6bone http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) - no new 6bone addresses will be allocated from 1/1/2004. - allocated 6bone addresses will not be valid anymore after 6/6/2006 C. Reports from the IETF - multi6 working group summary (Kurt Erik Lindqvist) Illjitsch van Beijnum: Who else is on the design team(s)? David Kessens: I will send the names I have to the list. D. Update on ttm progress (Henk Uijterwaal) Dropped from agenda. E. Global IPv6 routing table status - Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/R46-v6-table/ http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/R46-v6-table.pdf - IPv6 routing table anomalies http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ (Jeroen Massar) F. 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) Nothing to report. G. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) - RENATER's IPv6 activity (Bernard Tuy) Geza Turchanyi: What is the presentation's URL? Bernard Tuy: Visit http://www.m6bone.net/. H. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) None. Z. AOB None. ----

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Minutes for the ipv6 wg session RIPE45
by David Kessens 19 Jan '04

19 Jan '04

Hi, We didn't receive any comments on the minutes in the comment period so the draft minutes (v1) are now declared final. Please see below for the minutes of the ipv6 session at RIPE45. David K. --- Minutes IPv6 Working Group RIPE 45 The IPv6 Working Group session Wednesday 14 May, 16.30 - 18.30 A. Administrative Stuff: Chair (David Kessens, Nokia) Scribe (Timothy Lowe, RIPE NCC) Actions: 44.1 RIPE NCC Enable reverse delegation for the 6bone Andrei: after much discussion, 6bone will do it for themselves. #Action point closed# 44.2 Bernard Tuy To co-ordinate an IPv6 routing guideline document Discussion ongoing with Marc Blanchet (Hexago) for more comprehensive document. David: this point is being passed to the routing working group. #Action point closed# 44.3 RIPE NCC To investigate with IANA increasing the size of RIR allocations to rationalize routing David: discussion has begun between the parties so we can close this one. Gert Doering (Spacenet): I see at least 3 /23s being delegated in the interim and this is a shame. David: it is a bit tech and a bit policy so I this might need to go to the LIR working group. John Crain: ICANN There are discussions concerning this with the RIRs about a temporary solution. #action point closed#, discussion moved to policy working group 44.4 RIPE NCC Report back to the working group what the status is and what the issues are regarding: - enabling AAAA glue records in the . zone - AAAA glue records for delegations to TLDs - AAAA glue records for the root servers themselves, enabling ipv6 transport to the . zone John: AAAA in the root there are possible issues with too many AAAA records into the root zone. In the lab we are building a root zone with lots of AAAA queries to prove it is safe. We don't believe there will be any issues but we have some requests for this so we have to come back with proof that it is stable before going ahead. The Root server advisory committee will be asked to approve this before the summer. Mohsen Souissi (AFNIC): The request for comments document from IANA was run by myself and I sent IANA my comments. We have no issues for .fr with AAAA glue records under the root zone. Mr Vixie was asked to comment and had no technical issues. We have been waiting for a long time. John: yes I saw that and according to his draft not RFC but draft it has no issues but we have to ensure that it doesn't just work for .fr but for everyone. Also we have had little comment on his draft and no other tech tests of this. However we see that it is a good idea and we want to have this implemented as soon as possible. David: Who needs to sign off on this? John: inet clue elite David: good, it's not lost in the department of commerce. John: No we just have to present solid evidence to the Department of Commerce so they can approve Andrei:we tried to research this by asking Verisign what registrars support AAAA records. They said they don't know. Fortunately our registrar did it and we found that it was only blocked at the root zone. We wanted to change our registrar but the new one had no interest in doing AAAA dns. David: I think others have the same problem can you make public who is willing to do it? Lars-Johan Liman: can we see a way of changing the name on the right hand side of the ns delegation so that it doesn't conflict with the ns.ripe.net. Like ns6.ripe.net (we already have this see www.ripe.net/reverse) Andrei:I agree we should look into this but it was just to clarify that it should be looked into. David: this a DNS issue so we should pass it to them. Ok we should keep action open so we can hear about progress in this area? Good we keep it. B. Status of the 6bone http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) 6bone registry is now reachable over v6 in all aspects. Draft phase out plan of the addresses has been proposed. The cut off date for allocating ptlas is 20040101 and the date of phase out is 20060606. Some stats are 60 countries with ptlas in the 6bone C. University of Tennessee IPv6 network storage stack http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-ipv6-logistic.pdf (Alessandro Bassi - LoCI - Univ of Tennessee) Logistical networking, which is based on distributed network storage, is a project of the UTK Logistical Computing and Internetworking Lab. The LoCI Lab website: http://loci.cs.utk.edu/ D. Global IPv6 routing table status http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-ipv6-table/ (Gert Doering) Slide 12: Kurtis Lindqvist, Netnod: Can you track which blocks are allocated and which are routed? Also the delay between when the allocation was made and when it was first routed? Gert: My scripts don't do it but I can do that. I will look into it but no promises. Mohsen: Tunis isn't in Europe (refers to slide 15) Gert: sure but its around the mediteranian so around the corner sort of Europe. E. Report(s) about actual v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-tt-ipv6/page1.htm (Henk Uijterwaal, RIPE NCC) The test traffic project is now also able to measure the ipv6 Internet. F. Developments/initiatives in the RIPE region and beyond -Presentation (Bernard Tuy, RENATER) Geant IPv6 service M6bone worldwide deployment and multicast protocols for IPv6 6Net and on going IPv6 experiments G. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (No input from the audience) Z. AOB -----

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Agenda ipv6 wg RIPE47
by David Kessens 19 Jan '04

19 Jan '04

Hi, Below follows the agenda for the ipv6 wg for RIPE47. Note that we are meeting on tuesday instead of the usual wednesday slot. We occasionally change meeting time/date in order to make sure that we are not always scheduled with the same working group so that people who are interested in the other working group have a chance to go to that session for a change. Thanks & see you all on tuesday, David Kessens --- Agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE47 When: 14:00 - 15:30, Tuesday January 27, 2004 Where: St Johns II, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Ranges of ipv6 addresses and their use (Jeroen Massar) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (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) - Tunnel Detection Tool (Lorenzo Colitti, RIPE NCC, TTM project) - IPv6 Network Management (Bernard Tuy) E. Operational issues with IPv6: RPSLng testing, policy issues, filtering practices, peering (Simon Leinen, Swiss IPv6 task force & swiss IPv6 operations group) F. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) - latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli, CERN, time allowing) G. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC
by leo vegoda 12 Jan '04

12 Jan '04

Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2001:1A00::/23 from the IANA in January 2004. 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: <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/smallest-alloc-sizes.html> Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] FW: New IPv6 Allocation (2001:1a00::/23)
by Jeroen Massar 10 Jan '04

10 Jan '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- FYI, please adjust filters etc if you have set them. Reference filter set: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html Greets, Jeroen - -----Original Message----- From: Steve Conte [conte(a)iana.org] Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2004 1:47 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: New IPv6 Allocation Greetings, This is to inform you that the IANA has allocated 2001:1A00::/23 to the RIPE NCC. For a full list of IANA IPv6 allocations please see: <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-tla-assignments>. Thanks, Steve - --------------- Steve Conte - IANA conte(a)iana.org PGP KeyID: 0x0972C473 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / http://unfix.org/~jeroen iQA/AwUBP/9TrSmqKFIzPnwjEQK/gQCfaceFBP53zGBUGIqDXd7xkggNhk4An3Q0 li6/dxHnvSZm81DheQYCzRoM =/hGY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Call for agenda items and Draft Agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE47
by David Kessens 29 Dec '03

29 Dec '03

Hi, Below follows the draft agenda (v1) for the ipv6 wg for RIPE47. Note that we are meeting on tuesday instead of the usual wednesday slot. We occasionally change meeting time/date in order to make sure that we are not always scheduled with the same working group so that people who are interested in the other working group have a chance to go to that session for a change. I need your help to make the working group session interesting. Please let me know if you have any suggestions for agenda topics that you would like to have covered during the meeting or if you would like to contribute to one of the 'input of the audience' agenda items. Thanks, David K. --- Draft Agenda (v1) for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE47 When: 14:00 - 15:30, Tuesday January 27, 2004 Where: St Johns II, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Ranges of allocated ipv6 addresses and their use (Jeroen Massar) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (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) F. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB ---

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] RE: /48 micro allocations for v6 root servers, was: national security
by Jeroen Massar 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Paul Vixie wrote: > > /35 routes are being discouraged in favor of /32 entries... > > 4,064,000,000 addresses to ensure that just one host -might- > > have global reachability. IMHO, a /48 is even overkill... :) > > i think the important points for ietf@ to know about are (a) that this > is an open issue, (b) that it's generally agreed that all the > RIR's ought to have the same rules regarding microallocations, and (c) > exactly where (as in what working group or mailing list or smoke filled room) the > discussion is being held. for example, bill says above that > "/35 routes are being discouraged" and that's probably true but "by > whom?" and "where?" There are currently quite some ISP's who filter anything >/35. Generally ISP's should be filtering on allocation boundaries. Thus if a certain prefix is allocated as a /32, they should not be accepting anything smaller (/33, /34 etc) Checking http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/tla/all/ 8<------------ The database currently holds 630 IPv6 TLA's. Of which 18 (2.86%) are returned to the pool, 202 (32.06%) IPv6 TLA's didn't have a routing entry. Thus 410 (65.08%) networks are currently announced. 0 (0.00%) only announced a /35 while they have been assigned a /32. 13 (2.06%) announce both their /32 and their /35. - ------------>8 I have to add that there is an error here as 2001:dc0::/35 is in the tables, but doesn't get picked up by the software, will be fixing that soonish. Generally if you announce a /35 it will get through to most ISP's. But we should be avoiding that. Currently the ipv6 global routing table is quite small, but it could grow quite large and when ISP's still don't filter correctly, or better if ISP's don't aggregate it will explode and we will be needing the follow up to BGP soon, which is more work for the IETF :) As for which smoked filled room, this should be a task of the RIRs, thus RIPE's IPv6 WG etc. but it usually takes place when communicating between ISP's. Notice that many ISP's use Gerts list: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html I would applaud a generic /32 that is 'allowed' to being cut up into multiple /48's for the purpose of critical infrastructure. But please, keep it to 1 *documented* /32. That way people will know that they will see more specifics from that prefix and that they should be accepting it too. Currently the !3! IX blocks (2001:7f8::/32 + 2001:504::/32 + 2001:7fa::/32) are seen being announced in pieces too. Maybe these IX blocks, which are common already could be used for assigning 'critical infra' from? This is a RIR thing and should be discussed there (ipv6-wg cc'd). The IETF though should ofcourse advise in all matters. Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / jeroen(a)unfix.org / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ iQA/AwUBP9TmwCmqKFIzPnwjEQIk9gCfWIZU0RJA3OGyrbOFTa1+ZIvSDE4AniOW qOqG5k7653xd5LaLSLUAglde =mqwa -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

11 18

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] (no subject)
by Ilias Markantonis 16 Dec '03

16 Dec '03

hi!I am working in a mobile ip6 testbed and i hope you can tell me of a software better than ethereal which can print the binding updates and caches.also if this software has a plotting tool for the desired outputs,it would be perfect.

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] "...convene a public meeting to gather information about IPv6."
by Jim Fleming 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

December 12, 2003 http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/press/2003/IPv6_10142003.html October 14, 2003 "Specifically, the task force will issue a request for public comments in the next 45 days and will subsequently convene a public meeting to gather information about IPv6." ====

1 0

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] 2001:1700::/27 / CH-SUNRISE-20031124, check your prefix filters
by matthew.ford＠bt.com 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

Gert, You should probably change 2001:500::/32 to 2001:500::/30. This is now documented at http://www.arin.net/registration/ipv6/micro_alloc.html. Regards, Mat > -----Original Message----- > From: ipv6-wg-admin(a)ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin@ripe.net] > On Behalf Of Gert Doering > Sent: 12 December 2003 13:11 > To: Jeroen Massar > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.edu; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] 2001:1700::/27 / > CH-SUNRISE-20031124, check your prefix filters > > Hi, > > On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 10:42:22PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > At 2003-11-24 RIPE allocated 2001:1700::/27. > > ISP's doing IPv6 prefixlenght filtering should watch out > that they are > > not filtering out the above prefix > [..] > > Easiest way to avoid problems is to regulary check: > > http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html > > Thanks for pointing that out to me :-) - I have made the > accompanying text more explicit regarding the > already-allocated /31 and /27. > > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > -- > Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: > 57386 (57785) > > SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster(a)Space.Net > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 > 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 > >

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] 2001:1700::/27 / CH-SUNRISE-20031124, check your prefix filters
by Jeroen Massar 12 Dec '03

12 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi, At 2003-11-24 RIPE allocated 2001:1700::/27. ISP's doing IPv6 prefixlenght filtering should watch out that they are not filtering out the above prefix It is visible in most parts of the world, check: http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?find=2001:1700::/27 But it is also quite easy to see from that list that many ISP's do filter, somewhat fortunatly, but they do have to update their prefix filters ;) Easiest way to avoid problems is to regulary check: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html Even Gert's 'strict' filters allows the above prefix as it is based on the RIR's policies. A 'golden IPv6 network' page will be created to be able to lookup these prefixes without much problems Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / jeroen(a)unfix.org / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ iQA/AwUBP9eTOimqKFIzPnwjEQKz4wCgn7m7+puSY3uXxoQP+wZ6jPilfpwAn2ru wmQh1E574sqE/iqy6xtK+QS/ =97kN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 connectivity in Iran
by Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE-NCC) 11 Dec '03

11 Dec '03

Dear All, At the RIPE NCC regional meeting earlier this week, one of the participants asked me about IPv6 connectivity between a local network there and the rest of the world. I had no idea, but promised to post the question here. So: Is there anybody on this list who offers IPv6 connectivity in Iran _today_? Please reply privately, I'll forward the responses and summarize if there is interest. Henk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Henk Uijterwaal Email: henk.uijterwaal(a)ripe.net RIPE Network Coordination Centre WWW: http://www.ripe.net/home/henk P.O.Box 10096 Singel 258 Phone: +31.20.5354414 1001 EB Amsterdam 1016 AB Amsterdam Fax: +31.20.5354445 The Netherlands The Netherlands Mobile: +31.6.55861746 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ That problem that we weren't having yesterday, is it better? (Big ISP NOC)

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ip6.arpa broken because of arrowroot.arin.net + buchu.arin.net wrongly in .net gtld servers
by Jeroen Massar 28 Nov '03

28 Nov '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ip6.arpa is, according to the root-servers.net boxes hosted on: ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS ARROWROOT.ARIN.NET. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS BUCHU.ARIN.NET. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS NS.APNIC.NET. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS NS.ICANN.ORG. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS NS.RIPE.NET. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS SVC00.APNIC.NET. ;; Received 241 bytes from 198.41.0.4#53(A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET) in 97 ms But: $ dig @ARROWROOT.ARIN.NET ip6.arpa ns ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3 <<>> @ARROWROOT.ARIN.NET ip6.arpa ns ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 22022 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 13, ADDITIONAL: 13 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;ip6.arpa. IN NS ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: . 86400 IN NS A.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS B.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS C.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS D.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS E.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS F.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS G.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS H.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS I.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS J.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS K.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS L.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. . 86400 IN NS M.ROOT-SERVERS.NET. ;; Query time: 28 msec ;; SERVER: 198.133.199.110#53(ARROWROOT.ARIN.NET) ;; WHEN: Thu Nov 27 22:16:01 2003 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 445 There is a oddness here btw: $ dig @aloe.arin.net arrowroot.arin.net ;; ANSWER SECTION: arrowroot.arin.net. 10800 IN A 63.146.182.189 BUT according to the .net servers: $ dig @A.GTLD-SERVERS.net. arrowroot.arin.net ; <<>> DiG 9.2.3 <<>> @A.GTLD-SERVERS.net. arrowroot.arin.net ;; global options: printcmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 16818 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 8, ADDITIONAL: 8 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;arrowroot.arin.net. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: arrowroot.arin.net. 172800 IN A 198.133.199.110 Which is the address that is used above and in queries, the arin.net version does work btw. But this does break many queries. Btw ns.ripe.net reports: ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS ns.ripe.net. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS ns.apnic.net. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS ns.icann.org. ip6.arpa. 172800 IN NS tinnie.arin.net. So please get these in sync as it is breaking stuff miracously. Greets, Jeroen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int. Comment: Jeroen Massar / jeroen(a)unfix.org / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/ iQA/AwUBP8ZsNymqKFIzPnwjEQJbCwCgg/1Fbu/XOhFCY3iM6chmjDc51VEAoLjI jyFWB1H+/c/xJSu/B65Av7LU =oRLs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] First dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 handsets
by David Kessens 05 Nov '03

05 Nov '03

Hi, I think that you might like this news: Last week, Nokia announced the Nokia 7700, the first dual stack GSM/GPRS/EDGE phone: http://www.nokia.com/nokia/0,6771,47550,00.html And this week, the first dual stack CDMA phone was demonstrated: http://press.nokia.com/PR/200311/923589_5.html & http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/031105/daw010_1.html David K. ---

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Ipv6 addressing plan tool
by susana.caudelitome＠telefonica-data.com 24 Sep '03

24 Sep '03

Hi all. I'm looking for a tool to manage the IPv6 address allocation. Could anyone help me?. Thanks in advance. Regards. Susana. Conozca mejor eBA e-Soluciones de Banda Ancha en http://www.telefonica.es/eba Esperamos su visita en http://www.telefonica-data.es Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener informacion privilegiada o confidencial cuya divulgacion esta prohibida en virtud de la legislacion vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma via y proceda a su destruccion.

2 1

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] [iesg-secretary@ietf.org: Last Call: 'Delegation of 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa' to BCP]
by David Kessens 15 Sep '03

15 Sep '03

----- Forwarded message from The IESG <iesg-secretary(a)ietf.org> ----- To: IETF-Announce :; Cc: From: The IESG <iesg-secretary(a)ietf.org> Subject: Last Call: 'Delegation of 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa' to BCP Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 22:04:24 -0400 The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Delegation of 2.0.0.2.ip6.arpa ' <draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation-00.txt> as a BCP The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg(a)ietf.org or ietf(a)ietf.org mailing lists by 2003-10-12. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ymbk-6to4-arpa-delegation-00.txt ----- End forwarded message ----- David K. ---

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Draft minutes for ipv6 wg session RIPE45
by David Kessens 11 Sep '03

11 Sep '03

Hi, Please see below for a draft version of the working group minutes for the ipv6 session at RIPE45. I am sorry for the late posting, I only received the minutes right before the last meeting. The minutes will be declared final by Friday September 26, 2003 if I don't receive any comments other than small typos/corrections. Thanks, David K. --- Draft Minutes IPv6 Working Group RIPE 45 The IPv6 Working Group session Wednesday 14 May, 16.30 - 18.30 A. Administrative Stuff: Chair (David Kessens, Nokia) Scribe (Timothy Lowe, RIPE NCC) Actions: 44.1 RIPE NCC Enable reverse delegation for the 6bone Andrei: after much discussion, 6bone will do it for themselves. #Action point closed# 44.2 Bernard Tuy To co-ordinate an IPv6 routing guideline document Discussion ongoing with Marc Blanchet (Hexago) for more comprehensive document. David: this point is being passed to the routing working group. #Action point closed# 44.3 RIPE NCC To investigate with IANA increasing the size of RIR allocations to rationalize routing David: discussion has begun between the parties so we can close this one. Gert Doering (Spacenet): I see at least 3 /23s being delegated in the interim and this is a shame. David: it is a bit tech and a bit policy so I this might need to go to the LIR working group. John Crain: ICANN There are discussions concerning this with the RIRs about a temporary solution. #action point closed#, discussion moved to policy working group 44.4 RIPE NCC Report back to the working group what the status is and what the issues are regarding: - enabling AAAA glue records in the . zone - AAAA glue records for delegations to TLDs - AAAA glue records for the root servers themselves, enabling ipv6 transport to the . zone John: AAAA in the root there are possible issues with too many AAAA records into the root zone. In the lab we are building a root zone with lots of AAAA queries to prove it is safe. We don't believe there will be any issues but we have some requests for this so we have to come back with proof that it is stable before going ahead. The Root server advisory committee will be asked to approve this before the summer. Mohsen Souissi (AFNIC): The request for comments document from IANA was run by myself and I sent IANA my comments. We have no issues for .fr with AAAA glue records under the root zone. Mr Vixie was asked to comment and had no technical issues. We have been waiting for a long time. John: yes I saw that and according to his draft not RFC but draft it has no issues but we have to ensure that it doesn't just work for .fr but for everyone. Also we have had little comment on his draft and no other tech tests of this. However we see that it is a good idea and we want to have this implemented as soon as possible. David: Who needs to sign off on this? John: inet clue elite David: good, it's not lost in the department of commerce. John: No we just have to present solid evidence to the Department of Commerce so they can approve Andrei:we tried to research this by asking Verisign what registrars support AAAA records. They said they don't know. Fortunately our registrar did it and we found that it was only blocked at the root zone. We wanted to change our registrar but the new one had no interest in doing AAAA dns. David: I think others have the same problem can you make public who is willing to do it? Lars-Johan Liman: can we see a way of changing the name on the right hand side of the ns delegation so that it doesn't conflict with the ns.ripe.net. Like ns6.ripe.net (we already have this see www.ripe.net/reverse) Andrei:I agree we should look into this but it was just to clarify that it should be looked into. David: this a DNS issue so we should pass it to them. Ok we should keep action open so we can hear about progress in this area? Good we keep it. B. Status of the 6bone http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) 6bone registry is now reachable over v6 in all aspects. Draft phase out plan of the addresses has been proposed. The cut off date for allocating ptlas is 20040101 and the date of phase out is 20060606. Some stats are 60 countries with ptlas in the 6bone C. University of Tennessee IPv6 network storage stack http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-ipv6-logistic.pdf (Alessandro Bassi - LoCI - Univ of Tennessee) Logistical networking, which is based on distributed network storage, is a project of the UTK Logistical Computing and Internetworking Lab. The LoCI Lab website: http://loci.cs.utk.edu/ D. Global IPv6 routing table status http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-ipv6-table/ (Gert Doering) Slide 12: Kurtis Lindqvist, Netnod: Can you track which blocks are allocated and which are routed? Also the delay between when the allocation was made and when it was first routed? Gert: My scripts don't do it but I can do that. I will look into it but no promises. Mohsen: Tunis isn't in Europe (refers to slide 15) Gert: sure but its around the mediteranian so around the corner sort of Europe. E. Report(s) about actual v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-45/presentations/ ripe45-tt-ipv6/page1.htm (Henk Uijterwaal, RIPE NCC) The test traffic project is now also able to measure the ipv6 Internet. F. Developments/initiatives in the RIPE region and beyond -Presentation (Bernard Tuy, RENATER) Geant IPv6 service M6bone worldwide deployment and multicast protocols for IPv6 6Net and on going IPv6 experiments G. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (No input from the audience) Z. AOB -----

1 0

[ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Draft minutes for ipv6 wg session RIPE46
by David Kessens 10 Sep '03

10 Sep '03

Hi, Please see below for the draft minutes of the ipv6 wg session at RIPE46. We are still missing a few URLs for presentations. The minutes will be declared final by Friday September 26, 2003 if I don't receive any comments other than small typos and provided that I receive the missing urls for the presentations by that date. I hope this helps, David K. --- Draft minutes for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE46 When: 16:00 - 17:30, Wednesday September 3, 2003 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam Who: Chair: David Kessens Scribe: Pierre Baume A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe: Pierre Baume (RIPE NCC) - agenda bashing http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) Agenda point D below dropped. B. Status of the 6bone http://www.kessens.com/~david/presentations/ (David Kessens) - no new 6bone addresses will be allocated from 1/1/2004. - allocated 6bone addresses will not be valid anymore after 6/6/2006 C. Reports from the IETF - multi6 working group summary missing url (Kurt Erik Lindqvist) Illjitsch van Beijnum: Who else is on the design team(s)? David Kessens: I will send the names I have to the list. D. Update on ttm progress (Henk Uijterwaal) Dropped from agenda. E. Global IPv6 routing table status - Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/R46-v6-table/ http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/R46-v6-table.pdf - IPv6 routing table anomalies http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ (Jeroen Massar) F. 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) Nothing to report. G. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) - RENATER's IPv6 activity missing url (Bernard Tuy) Geza Turchanyi: What is the presentation's URL? Bernard Tuy: Visit http://www.m6bone.net/. H. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) None. Z. AOB None. Action (for Everybody) - Read the Activity Plan 2004 and tell the RIPE NCC/Board what you want! ----

1 0

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast
by matthew.ford＠bt.com 04 Sep '03

04 Sep '03

Thanks for helping Jeroen. My problems were entirely firewall related. Sorry for bothering you all. Mat > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeroen Massar [mailto:jeroen@unfix.org] > Sent: 04 September 2003 00:48 > To: Ford,M,Mat,XGH5 FORDM5 R; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Cc: ripecast(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > matthew.ford(a)bt.com wrote: > > > OK, so now all links from > > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/webcast.html are > not working > > for me. The IPv6 link appears to connect but bombs out while > > 'buffering'. Is anyone succesfully connected at the moment? > > Currently (01:42 CET/Amsterdam time) there are no broadcasts thus > one can't watch them either. The archives (bottom of the page) > work, at least the IPv6-wg one did with Windows Mediaplayer 9 over > my home DSL line. I haven't tested the live feeds but I understood > from Jakub Vlasek (.cz) that he had quite a clear live feed there...

1 0

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast
by matthew.ford＠bt.com 04 Sep '03

04 Sep '03

OK, so now all links from http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-46/webcast.html are not working for me. The IPv6 link appears to connect but bombs out while 'buffering'. Is anyone succesfully connected at the moment? Mat > -----Original Message----- > From: matthew.ford(a)bt.com [mailto:matthew.ford@bt.com] > Sent: 02 September 2003 15:38 > To: cfriacas(a)fccn.pt; ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Cc: ripecast(a)ripe.net > Subject: RE: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast > > > this is funny - the only server that works for me is the ipv6 > server :-) > > mat > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Carlos Friacas [mailto:cfriacas@fccn.pt] > > Sent: 02 September 2003 14:30 > > To: ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > > Cc: ripecast(a)ripe.net > > Subject: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > I've noticed today that CEZNET is providing a streaming > > server (RIPE-46 > > sessions) with IPv6: > > > > + server6.streaming.cesnet.cz > > + 2001:718:1:7:230:48ff:fe42:30de > > + traceroute6 is OK from here (11 hops) > > + ping6 is OK from here (55 avg rtt) > > > > However, im failing to see the session using version 9.00.00.3008 of > > MediaPlayer and VideoLan 0.5.2 under WinXP (and it works fine > > on the v4 > > streaming servers with both clients...) > > > > Has anybody tried this v6 server? Can anybody give me an > hint on this? > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > Regards, > > > > ./Carlos "Upgrade the > > Internet! -- Now!" > > -------------- [http://www.ip6.fccn.pt] > > http://www.fccn.pt > > <cfriacas(a)fccn.pt>, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN, > > Wide Area Network Workgroup > > FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional > > fax:+351 218472167 > > > > "Internet is just routes (125953/461), naming (millions) > > and... people!" > > > > > >

3 2

RE: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast
by matthew.ford＠bt.com 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

this is funny - the only server that works for me is the ipv6 server :-) mat > -----Original Message----- > From: Carlos Friacas [mailto:cfriacas@fccn.pt] > Sent: 02 September 2003 14:30 > To: ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net > Cc: ripecast(a)ripe.net > Subject: [ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net] IPv6 Webcast > > > > Hello, > > I've noticed today that CEZNET is providing a streaming > server (RIPE-46 > sessions) with IPv6: > > + server6.streaming.cesnet.cz > + 2001:718:1:7:230:48ff:fe42:30de > + traceroute6 is OK from here (11 hops) > + ping6 is OK from here (55 avg rtt) > > However, im failing to see the session using version 9.00.00.3008 of > MediaPlayer and VideoLan 0.5.2 under WinXP (and it works fine > on the v4 > streaming servers with both clients...) > > Has anybody tried this v6 server? Can anybody give me an hint on this? > > Thanks in advance. > > Regards, > > ./Carlos "Upgrade the > Internet! -- Now!" > -------------- [http://www.ip6.fccn.pt] > http://www.fccn.pt > <cfriacas(a)fccn.pt>, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN, > Wide Area Network Workgroup > FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional > fax:+351 218472167 > > "Internet is just routes (125953/461), naming (millions) > and... people!" > >

1 0