- ipv6-wg - mailman.ripe.net

Re: [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 50, Issue 3
by Timothy Roy 03 Nov '15

03 Nov '15

I agree with all on this one, It is time to rock and roll with IPV6 and as was stated earlier, if someone does not like they can choose the other one. I think it will be a boost for IPV6 (if all goes well). -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg [mailto:ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of ipv6-wg-request(a)ripe.net Sent: 03 November 2015 15:00 To: ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net Subject: ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 50, Issue 3 Send ipv6-wg mailing list submissions to ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ipv6-wg-request(a)ripe.net You can reach the person managing the list at ipv6-wg-owner(a)ripe.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ipv6-wg digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: IPv6-only network during RIPE 71 (Sander Steffann) 2. Re: IPv6-only network during RIPE 71 (Sander Steffann) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 11:54:33 +0100 From: Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl> To: Shane Kerr <shane(a)time-travellers.org> Cc: Marco Hogewoning <marcoh(a)marcoh.net>, "ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net IPv6" <ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net> Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6-only network during RIPE 71 Message-ID: <72AAB357-AD25-4B1C-8BAC-4CC6F70836AE(a)steffann.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Shane, Op 3 nov. 2015, om 03:21 heeft Shane Kerr <shane(a)time-travellers.org> het volgende geschreven: > tl;dr Don't so cautious. Removing the "experimental" tag from IPv6 won't > ruin the RIPE meeting. +1 Well said :) Sander ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 11:58:07 +0100 From: Sander Steffann <sander(a)steffann.nl> To: Philip Homburg <pch-ripeml(a)u-1.phicoh.com> Cc: "ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net IPv6" <ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net> Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6-only network during RIPE 71 Message-ID: <C18918DD-63AC-4966-92C1-9CF78822E0FD(a)steffann.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > (Can't wait for a request for Atlas to support NAT64, that's going to > be > interesting) Request! Cheers, Sander PS (in Dutch): iets met slapende honden wakker maken ;) End of ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 50, Issue 3 **************************************

1 0

: IGF Best Practice Forum document review “Creating an Enabling Environment for IPv6 Adoption"
by Marco Hogewoning 03 Nov '15

03 Nov '15

Dear colleagues, As mentioned in my email on 24 August, over the past few months we have been working on a project to document some high-level best practices on IPv6 adoption, titled “Creating an Enabling Environment for IPv6 Adoption.” This work is part of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) inter-sessional efforts to create more tangible outcomes for the IGF by collecting and documenting best practices on a variety of topics. With the IGF 2015 taking place next week from 10-13 November, this project is drawing to a close and the final draft document is now published and open for review. The document is available at: http://review.intgovforum.org/?p=3987 You can use this same website to submit any comments. Comments will close on 14 November 2015, after which a final version of the document that incorporates any comments received will be released and made available for distribution. On day two of the IGF (11 November) from 09:00-10:30 local time (UTC-3) there will also be a session in which the main contributors will discuss the document and its main conclusions on what they believe are enabling factors that contribute to IPv6 adoption. Just like all sessions at the IGF, remote participation for this session will be available via http://www.intgovforum.org. Please follow the instructions that will be posted on that website. Finally I would like to thank all the RIPE community members that have contributed to this project, by responding to our survey or by making direct contributions on the mailing list or conference calls. Regards, Marco Hogewoning RIPE NCC - External Relations

1 0

New on RIPE Labs: IPv6 on the March
by Mirjam Kuehne 25 Sep '15

25 Sep '15

Dear colleagues, In this new RIPE Labs article Tony Smith from APNIC is looking at the increase in IPv6 deployment now ARIN has depleted their free pool of IPv4 addresses: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-on-the-march Kind regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC

1 0

Re: [ipv6-wg] [ipv6-wg-chair] ipv6 deployment startup
by Jen Linkova 22 Sep '15

22 Sep '15

Hi Nadim, On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 9:59 PM, Nadim Houeiss <nadim(a)win-dsl.com> wrote: > looking to start the deployment of ipv6 only network for a new part in my > network , i need to have info about wish solution will be the best to be > used for NAT64 techniques for new ipv6 only end users will be able to reach > ipv4 different services and web servers on the web. As far as I know most network vendors (Cisco, Juniper etc) support NAT64 on their equipment. However don't forget that you'd need DNS64 as well, so I'd suggest to check if the DNS solution you are using currently supports DNS64. >From my experience the main issue is not choosing a vendor for NAT64 but dealing with broken applications: - applications which assume than "no IPv4 address" means "no Internet connectivity" and not even trying to establish any connections if the device does not receive Ipv4 address; - applications which are using IPv4 literals; - applications which ask for "A" DNS RR only, so DNS64 does not help etc. > looking forward for your reply, BTW I'm removing ipv-wg-chairs@ (as it is just an alias which is used to reach RIPE IPv6 Working group chairs) and adding RIPE IPv6 mailing list. -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry

2 1

[training] RIPE NCC Webinars - new dates
by Training Services 22 Sep '15

22 Sep '15

Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce the launch of new dates for our Webinars. The RIPE NCC Webinars are live and take only one hour. You can interact with our trainers without leaving your desk. We focus on the topics and issues most important for LIRs. Register now at https://www.ripe.net/support/training/learn-online/webinars Participation is limited to 20 people, so don't hesitate if you want to take part! If you have questions, please email <training(a)ripe.net>. We look forward to seeing you online. Kind regards, RIPE NCC Training Services

1 0

[training] IP Address Space Course this November in Bucharest
by Training Services 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

Dear colleagues, We are happy to announce that a RIPE NCC training course will take place on the Sunday before the RIPE 71 Meeting in Bucharest this November. This course will focus on how to obtain and manage IP address space. The course is free of charge and is open to anyone interested. The course will cover the most frequently asked questions that the RIPE NCC receives about IP address space. ----------------- Course details ---------------- IPv6 Address Space Basics: How to Obtain and Manage Your IP Addresses Sunday, 15 November 2015, 10-16:00 JW Marriott Bucharest Grand Hotel ---------------- Course goals ---------------- By the end of this course, you will be able to: - Manage your IPv4 and IPv6 addresses according to current RIPE Policies - Understand how to obtain IPv4 addresses through transfers - Protect your address space from hijacking ---------------------------------------- Who will benefit from this course? ----------------------------------------- Anyone interested in the policies and procedures around address space in the RIPE NCC service region will find this course useful. No prior knowledge of the topic is necessary. ------------------------- Course outline: ------------------------- - Becoming a RIPE NCC member (why and how) - Obtaining IP addresses (IPv4 and IPv6) - IP address space transfers, mergers and acquisitions - IPv6 basics - Address space hijacking - Resource Certification (RPKI) ---------------------------- Additional information ---------------------------- - Free of charge - Coffee and lunch will be provided - Delivered by the RIPE NCC’s Training Services and Registration Services departments ----------------------------------------- Registration for RIPE NCC members ----------------------------------------- If you are a RIPE NCC member and interested in attending this course, please visit our website on the following page to register: <https://lirportal.ripe.net/training/register/courseCode/LIR20150032> ------------------------------------ Registration for non-members ------------------------------------- If you are not (yet) a member, please fill out the following information and send this to <training(a)ripe.net>: - Email: - Course name: - Full name : - Vegetarian: yes/no Be quick - we only have 45 seats available on a first come, first served basis! If there is enough interest, we will continue to offer courses on different topics of interest alongside future RIPE Meetings. Kind regards, RIPE NCC Training Services

1 0

Re: [ipv6-wg] [v6ops] Why operators filter IPv6 packets with extension headers?
by Eric Vyncke (evyncke) 08 Sep '15

08 Sep '15

Fernando et al., A couple of quick comments: - this reminds me of taylor-v6ops-fragdrop (which you cite at the end), did you approach any of this old I-D authors? - not sure whether the security implications should be re-stated again in this document, let's rather split the security & operational issues into two documents - in the introduction, 'widespread implementation limitations' is probably too strong (and I agree that my employer products could do better) - in the introduction, "intentionally dropped" ? I am afraid that some drop are not intentional - I would shorten a lot the section 3 (security implications) and simply put a lot of references to existing good documents of yours and others - I like section 4 (operational implications) but it does not match the title, it is more about why transit operators have to look at layer-4 - section 4 approaches the goal described in the abstract but actually only provide clues why operators intentionally (or non intentionally) drops packets with EH. For example, being unable to do ECMP is of course an operational impact but why would it be the cause of EH drop? - section 4.1 (iACL), beyond the permit/deny, some operators also rate limit some traffic such pings - section 4.1, perhaps worth mentioning that infrastructure ACL are more in the white list approach, i.e., what is not BGP/ICMP (in your example) to some prefixes is dropped, so, if someone uses EH to obscure the traffic, this EH traffic matching the destination prefix is dropped anyway by the ACL (so iACL works) but traffic destined to other destination is not impacted. Or did I got something wrong? - section 4.2 (route processor protection) is a little unclear - the processing of HbH would kill the Internet of course (at least with most routers), should HbH be separately called? - section 4.3 (DDoS mitigation), I am unsure about FlowSPec but can it also specify 'any traffic with EH' ? This would do the trick probably for dropping or diverting the DoS packets? - missing issue is lack of granular EH control by some routers, for example if an operator wants to block its subscribers RH-0 but can only drop RH (because RH type cannot be specified), then all RH are dropped including MIPv6 - section 5 (potential attack vector) appears to be focus on fragment drop by the public Internet. While it can probably work, the issues are twofold: 1) bad host implementations not doing enough tests before accepting a ICMP packet-too-big 2) public Internet dropping valid fragments in transit In both cases, we (the industry, vendors + operators) need to fix those two issues. May I STRONGLY suggest to remove all security issues (other docs are describing this) and focus only on the operational issues (esp in V6OPS) ? And skip any discussion on the rationale why packets with EH are dropped? Hope this helps to refine a potentially useful I-D. -éric On 1/09/15 03:17, "v6ops on behalf of Fernando Gont" <v6ops-bounces(a)ietf.org on behalf of fernando(a)gont.com.ar> wrote: >Folks, > >The topic of operators dropping IPv6 packets containing extension >headers has been raised quite a few times on this list and elsewhere. > >A month ago or so we published a document trying to summarize the >reasons for which operators filter IPv6 packets containing extension >headers. The document is available at: ><https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-00.txt> > >We're currently working on a revision of this document, and would like >to hear feedback from the working group regarding our document. e.g., > >* Did we get anything wrong? >* Is there anything missing? > >Or, if you like the document and agree with its content, that's also >interesting feedback to have. > >Thanks! > >Best regards, >-- >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 > > > >_______________________________________________ >v6ops mailing list >v6ops(a)ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

4 3

Why operators filter IPv6 packets with extension headers?
by Fernando Gont 01 Sep '15

01 Sep '15

Folks, The topic of operators dropping IPv6 packets containing extension headers has been raised quite a few times on a number of mailing-lists and forums. A month ago or so we published a document trying to summarize the reasons for which operators filter IPv6 packets containing extension headers. The document is available at: <https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-00.txt> We're currently working on a revision of this document, and would like to hear feedback from the ops community regarding our document. e.g., * Did we get anything wrong? * Is there anything missing? Or, if you like the document and agree with its content, that's also interesting feedback to have. P.S.: If possible, please CC <v6ops(a)ietf.org> and <draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops(a)tools.ietf.org> when sending feedback. Thanks! Best regards, -- 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

1 0

[training] RIPE NCC Training Courses October-December 2015
by Training Services 27 Aug '15

27 Aug '15

Dear colleagues, Our training team travels the RIPE NCC service region to deliver training courses to our members without any additional cost. Over the next few months, we'll be in Amsterdam, Athens, Odessa, Naples, Cardiff, Barcelona, Oslo, Bucharest, Budapest, Istanbul, Zagreb, Doha, Berlin. Visit the following page to register and to check which training courses we are giving in your area: https://lirportal.ripe.net/training/courses The RIPE NCC delivers the following training courses: - LIR Training Course - RIPE Database Training Course - Basic IPv6 Training Course - 2 days Advanced IPv6 Training Course - Routing Security Training Course - DNSSEC Training Course For more information visit: https://www.ripe.net/support/training/courses With kind regards, Rumy Spratley-Kanis Training Services Manager

1 0

IGF Seeking Input: “Creating an Enabling Environment for IPv6 Adoption”
by Marco Hogewoning 24 Aug '15

24 Aug '15

Dear colleagues, As part of this year's Internet Governance Forum (IGF), an IPv6 Best Practice Forum will discuss successful approaches that encourage IPv6 adoption. To get the most out of this effort, we would like to invite you to contribute your experiences to the forum. IGF Best Practice Forums rely on input from stakeholders across the Internet community and are open to anyone who would like to contribute. The RIPE NCC and other RIRs are participating in this discussion and we hope that RIPE community members will also take part. The goal of the forum is to create a high-level document that describes successful efforts to stimulate IPv6 adoption in both the public and private sectors. An example might be the creation of a task force that coordinated to remove barriers to IPv6 adoption. The group has already created a survey aimed at IPv6 task forces, which is available here: https://goo.gl/kQhmz We would like to further invite you to share any specific examples where commercial needs were addressed, such as creating a business case to secure management support for IPv6. A dedicated public mailing list has been developed for this project, which is available here: http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org More information on the IGF IPv6 Best Practice Forum can be found here: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/2008-igf-hyderabad/event-reports/78-best-pra… We invite you to contribute using the links above. If you have any questions about this effort or the IGF in general, please don’t hesitate to contact me. Kind regards Marco Hogewoning External Relations Officer RIPE NCC

1 0