Re: [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2
1. Re: RIPE72 IPv6 WG: call for presentations (Benedikt Stockebrand) Hello to all I think the basic work for ISPs in concern to IPv6 is covered. But i miss the topics to be addressed if you want to migrate from a IPv4 Microsoft Active domain using company to an system where most server in an enterprise could by just IPv6 only and use technologies like NAT46 ( SIIT-DC ) or similar to still make IPv4 only windows clients happy. Switching an enterprise with location around the global from a "we donot route any IPv6 traffic across our WAN Links" "most servers have IPv6 disabled" to We start IPv6 routing partially and enable partial IPv6 support on servers in a Microsoft ADS environment seems not covered in most IPv6 covering websites and presentations. Maintaining dual stack for the datacenters is just painfull and there should be a "single" device in the form of NAT46/SIIT/SIIT-DC in front of each server area. I am not sure that Active directory is ready for that. We are currently moving a complete test ads domain into a Testlab with locations in AT/CN/FI/US into dualstack and here we accept a "not working" during migration and i also hope we can move some servers into a IPv6 only area of those networks. But for a production move we need to be shure that a partial enabling of Dualstack and IPv6 only networking for servers does not break things. Any ideas or links which could help us here? best regards Christian Bretterhofer https://andritz.me ( one Testlab DMZ)
christian bretterhofer <christian.bretterhofer@gmail.com> writes: Hi,
"most servers have IPv6 disabled"
I'm always wondering about that part. The only information from Microsoft I could find is "turn of IPv6 at your own risk. We only tested it with IPv6 enabled."
But for a production move we need to be shure that a partial enabling of Dualstack and IPv6 only networking for servers does not break things.
I'm currently working for a university. I don't do windows but all newer Windows server are dual-stacked. I don't think there are any problems. Unfortunately the main public facing servers (web, mail) are not dual-stacked but that is purely a Layer 8 problem.
Any ideas or links which could help us here?
You may find some things documented here: http://wiki.test-ipv6.com/wiki/Main_Page If you stumble over another problem it would be great if you document it in the there. This wiki could use more content. You may also find some information here: http://luka.manojlovic.net/2016/03/13/ipv6-in-windows-environment-for-beginn... For the client side: We enabled IPv6 in the wireless network in October 2015 and had no complaints so far. There about 3-4.000 Clients online during day time. If I figure out why I only see IPv6 in the sflow export from the brocade switches (miss)used as border routers I could provide some traffic stats. Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Christian and list, christian bretterhofer <christian.bretterhofer@gmail.com> writes:
I think the basic work for ISPs in concern to IPv6 is covered.
well, depends on the ISP in question. To me it looks a lot like many are still struggling to get the necessary knowledge and experience to their tech and support crowd---not necessarily with the people actively involved in the RIPE community, but at least with the big ones. A customer recently asked one of the large players here in Germany if they were interested in a contract that would have allowed my customer to outsource some IPv6-related tasks---or rather, to outsource some tasks that were also expected to be supported via IPv6. They were turned down with the explanation "we don't have the necessary manpower to operate this".
But i miss the topics to be addressed if you want to migrate from a IPv4 Microsoft Active domain using company to an system where most server in an enterprise could by just IPv6 only and use technologies like NAT46 ( SIIT-DC ) or similar to still make IPv4 only windows clients happy.
Now I've taken a bit of a look at these things, but then I'm not exactly a Microsoft guy. From all I've seen, going for NAT64 and such is generally a bad idea. Instead, ensure that IPv6 is provided wherever it is needed and then make your servers dual stacked. Yes, that frequently involves upgrades on various servers nobody really wants to touch, but the very reasons why nobody wants to touch them are the reasons why you actually clean that stuff up.
Switching an enterprise with location around the global from a "we donot route any IPv6 traffic across our WAN Links" "most servers have IPv6 disabled" to We start IPv6 routing partially and enable partial IPv6 support on servers in a Microsoft ADS environment seems not covered in most IPv6 covering websites and presentations.
That may be because your approach is unnecessarily painful. You want to get IPv6 up and running in the network infrastructure first, then make your servers dual-stacked and then deal with the clients. At least that's the "strategic" outline of an approach. Beyond that it's really a lot of detail work to do on an individual basis.
Maintaining dual stack for the datacenters is just painfull and there should be a "single" device in the form of NAT46/SIIT/SIIT-DC in front of each server area. I am not sure that Active directory is ready for that.
Nonononono, don't do that. Whenever something goes wrong with that "single device", you'll have a serious disruption of service, not everything works through it, and you'll never ever get a chance to get rid of it in the long run because there'll always be that one last server that depends on it, or might depend on it but nobody knows for sure. Yes, that means that you need to have all your servers dual stacked, and yes, that's some serious extra workload in a data center context, but anything else is quite likely way worse. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-) Silvia -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: ipv6-wg [mailto:ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net] Im Auftrag von Benedikt Stockebrand Gesendet: Montag, 25. April 2016 20:14 An: christian bretterhofer Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Betreff: Re: [ipv6-wg] ipv6-wg Digest, Vol 55, Issue 2 Hi Christian and list, christian bretterhofer <christian.bretterhofer@gmail.com> writes:
I think the basic work for ISPs in concern to IPv6 is covered.
well, depends on the ISP in question. To me it looks a lot like many are still struggling to get the necessary knowledge and experience to their tech and support crowd---not necessarily with the people actively involved in the RIPE community, but at least with the big ones. A customer recently asked one of the large players here in Germany if they were interested in a contract that would have allowed my customer to outsource some IPv6-related tasks---or rather, to outsource some tasks that were also expected to be supported via IPv6. They were turned down with the explanation "we don't have the necessary manpower to operate this".
But i miss the topics to be addressed if you want to migrate from a IPv4 Microsoft Active domain using company to an system where most server in an enterprise could by just IPv6 only and use technologies like NAT46 ( SIIT-DC ) or similar to still make IPv4 only windows clients happy.
Now I've taken a bit of a look at these things, but then I'm not exactly a Microsoft guy. From all I've seen, going for NAT64 and such is generally a bad idea. Instead, ensure that IPv6 is provided wherever it is needed and then make your servers dual stacked. Yes, that frequently involves upgrades on various servers nobody really wants to touch, but the very reasons why nobody wants to touch them are the reasons why you actually clean that stuff up.
Switching an enterprise with location around the global from a "we donot route any IPv6 traffic across our WAN Links" "most servers have IPv6 disabled" to We start IPv6 routing partially and enable partial IPv6 support on servers in a Microsoft ADS environment seems not covered in most IPv6 covering websites and presentations.
That may be because your approach is unnecessarily painful. You want to get IPv6 up and running in the network infrastructure first, then make your servers dual-stacked and then deal with the clients. At least that's the "strategic" outline of an approach. Beyond that it's really a lot of detail work to do on an individual basis.
Maintaining dual stack for the datacenters is just painfull and there should be a "single" device in the form of NAT46/SIIT/SIIT-DC in front of each server area. I am not sure that Active directory is ready for that.
Nonononono, don't do that. Whenever something goes wrong with that "single device", you'll have a serious disruption of service, not everything works through it, and you'll never ever get a chance to get rid of it in the long run because there'll always be that one last server that depends on it, or might depend on it but nobody knows for sure. Yes, that means that you need to have all your servers dual stacked, and yes, that's some serious extra workload in a data center context, but anything else is quite likely way worse. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Hi,
Op 25 apr. 2016, om 19:35 heeft Silvia Hagen <silvia.hagen@sunny.ch> het volgende geschreven:
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-)
I have been doing some enterprise stuff as well recently. If there is going to be such a panel I would love to participate! :) Cheers, Sander
Hi folks, sorry for the late reply, but now that Jen is back I've taken a couple days off myself. Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
Op 25 apr. 2016, om 19:35 heeft Silvia Hagen <silvia.hagen@sunny.ch> het volgende geschreven:
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-)
I have been doing some enterprise stuff as well recently. If there is going to be such a panel I would love to participate! :)
Unless Jen somehow scares away various speakers (and I guess that's something she's *not* going to be particularly successful with:-) our schedule is already pretty full. Otherwise, I heartily agree. IPv6 is currently changing from an ISP issue to an enterprise and (especially small to medium) content provider issue. And if I've learned anything the last two years, then that this opens a completely different can of worms. Maybe we can do that panel discussion in Madrid(?) Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> wrote:
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-)
I have been doing some enterprise stuff as well recently. If there is going to be such a panel I would love to participate! :)
Unless Jen somehow scares away various speakers (and I guess that's something she's *not* going to be particularly successful with:-) our schedule is already pretty full.
Otherwise, I heartily agree. IPv6 is currently changing from an ISP issue to an enterprise and (especially small to medium) content provider issue. And if I've learned anything the last two years, then that this opens a completely different can of worms.
Maybe we can do that panel discussion in Madrid(?)
Sounds like a plan ;) -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes: Hi,
Otherwise, I heartily agree. IPv6 is currently changing from an ISP issue to an enterprise and (especially small to medium) content provider issue.
When I look for example at https://www.vyncke.org/ipv6status/detailed.php?country=de I would say many (most?) content providers have to work on IPv6. And may I add cloud providers? Last time I checked none of the big players (Amazon, Google, ...) supported IPv6 in their cloud products. Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jens and list, Jens Link <lists@quux.de> writes:
When I look for example at https://www.vyncke.org/ipv6status/detailed.php?country=de I would say many (most?) content providers have to work on IPv6.
that's the point. And I still find it difficult to tell people that the increasing number of users stuck behind DS-Lite will actually become a problem to the IPv4-only content providers---at best things will be slower, but at worst they will work less reliably.
And may I add cloud providers?
No, you may not. Definitely not. Go away. And take those enterprises using them as a cheap CDN with you...
Last time I checked none of the big players (Amazon, Google, ...) supported IPv6 in their cloud products.
And what's even more frustrating: The Amazon stuff at some time supported IPv6 at least on a best effort base, but they switched it off again. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes: Hi,
And may I add cloud providers?
No, you may not. Definitely not. Go away. And take those enterprises using them as a cheap CDN with you...
Well many content providers / startups use "the cloud". No IPv6 there, no content.
And what's even more frustrating: The Amazon stuff at some time supported IPv6 at least on a best effort base, but they switched it off again.
AFAIK only for HTTP(S) Loadbalancing. Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jens and list, Jens Link <lists@quux.de> writes:
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes:
Hi,
And may I add cloud providers?
No, you may not. Definitely not. Go away. And take those enterprises using them as a cheap CDN with you...
Well many content providers / startups use "the cloud". No IPv6 there, no content.
Stopitstopitstopitstopit!
And what's even more frustrating: The Amazon stuff at some time supported IPv6 at least on a best effort base, but they switched it off again.
AFAIK only for HTTP(S) Loadbalancing.
Which according to some totally unconfirmed rumors was "good enough" for some organization to use as their wannabe CDN. And then Amazon switched IPv6 support off again... I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least battery acid. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Hi, On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:16:51PM +0000, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote:
I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least battery acid.
This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds? cloud, cloud, cloud! *So* much space in the cloud for long IPv6 addresses! Gert Doering -- troll -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Not very likely. In most cloud environments I've been exposed to Business is the sole-driver to change. Likewise when we are looking at billing-models per-hour-per-unit billing is effectively now turning your technical problems into business problems. As long as there is no major near-zombie-apocalypse business-driver for IPv6. We will continue enjoying the services and environments we deserve... Pass me the drain-cleaner. I too need a drink! --Dennis On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:16:51PM +0000, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote:
I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least battery acid.
This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds?
cloud, cloud, cloud!
*So* much space in the cloud for long IPv6 addresses!
Gert Doering -- troll -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Hi Dennis and list, Dennis Lundström <dennis@umnum.ca> writes:
Not very likely. In most cloud environments I've been exposed to Business is the sole-driver to change.
on a more serious note: That wouldn't actually be all bad, but it's the rather shortsighted manner of doing so. Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with DS-Lite I still hope that at some point organizations providing content (like webshops or such) will realize that they have to go IPv6. What I find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution on short notice. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Hi Benedict,
Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with DS-Lite I still hope that at some point organizations providing content (like webshops or such) will realize that they have to go IPv6.
It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN.
What I find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution on short notice.
I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by now... Cheers, Sander
Hi Sander and list, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
[DS-Lite starting to hurt on the content side]
It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN.
it is indeed. But banks are more IT-savvy and more security aware than most other enterprises, so while the market is growing, it still is surprisingly (and frustratingly) small. But it takes time for the word to spread, and more often than not people mistake IPv6 for the actual problem, rather than IPv4 over DS-Lite etc.
What I find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution on short notice.
I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by now...
This is another one of those weird things. The CDNs to my knowledge just got it up and running, but why on earth are the cloud providers lagging behind? With regard to networking they are doing pretty much the same: They host some customers stuff and make sure it is accessible from around the world. Hmm. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider probably wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would have to reimplement it for IPv6 Sent from my iPad
On 07 May 2016, at 20:35, Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> wrote:
Hi Sander and list,
Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> writes:
[DS-Lite starting to hurt on the content side]
It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN.
it is indeed. But banks are more IT-savvy and more security aware than most other enterprises, so while the market is growing, it still is surprisingly (and frustratingly) small.
But it takes time for the word to spread, and more often than not people mistake IPv6 for the actual problem, rather than IPv4 over DS-Lite etc.
What I find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution on short notice.
I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by now...
This is another one of those weird things. The CDNs to my knowledge just got it up and running, but why on earth are the cloud providers lagging behind? With regard to networking they are doing pretty much the same: They host some customers stuff and make sure it is accessible from around the world.
Hmm.
Cheers,
Benedikt
-- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/
Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects
BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Hi, On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:03:37PM +0200, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider probably wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would have to reimplement it for IPv6
And this comes as total surprise to them exactly *why*? gert -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Ivan Pepelnjak <ipepelnjak@gmail.com> writes:
The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider probably wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would have to reimplement it for IPv6
I can't hear it anymore. Sometimes IT is a world full of surprises and magic. Puff and it 1999. Oh year 2000 is coming[1]. Puff and the support for Windows XP[2] ends. Puff and there are only few IPv4 addresses left. Puff and many access providers are doing some form of large scale NAT and maybe IPv6. Puff and the solution we bought last year doesn't support IPv6. But we need IPv6 now. About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?" There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3]. Just my 2 cents. Jens [1] I attended an IT training in 1999 and the trainer ask "Anybody of you know COBOL? I told a customer about 20 years about y2k. He called last week." [2] Just mentioning this because I was hired by an Insurance company to do IPv6 consulting while some people behind my were managing the transition from XP to Windows 7. [3] "We never will need IPv6" or "We can add this later" are the most common answers I guess. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jens and list, Jens Link <lists@quux.de> writes:
Sometimes IT is a world full of surprises and magic. Puff and it 1999. Oh year 2000 is coming[1]. Puff and the support for Windows XP[2] ends. Puff and there are only few IPv4 addresses left. Puff and many access providers are doing some form of large scale NAT and maybe IPv6. Puff and the solution we bought last year doesn't support IPv6. But we need IPv6 now.
These days, when I'm in the mood and I'm talking to the right people, I simply tell them: "I've decided to focus my work on IPv6 in 2003, and I'm still not sure if it was a smart decision. But the first time I negotiate a four digit hourly rate, then I'll know I was right." Occasionally that seems to get the message home.
About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?"
Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers never ever to come back. "*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!" "We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to us."
There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3].
And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Anno domini 2016 Benedikt Stockebrand scripsit: Hi,
About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?"
Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers never ever to come back.
"*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!"
"We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to us."
That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context. I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't know any. Does anyone have a good example here? Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high. Don't anyone talk about diamonds now..
There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3].
And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running.
*sigh* Where's that drain cleaner? Best Max -- <@Cord> *gnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn* unsre kleine Servermanufaktur hat wieder zugeschlagen. <@Cord> Java-Update... nun auf dem 10ten Server... alles glatt gegangen. <@ixs> Cord: und das, meine damen und herren, ist warum sie automatisierung kaufen sollten. damit sie auch morgen noch kraftvoll adminstrieren koennen..
Hi Max and list, Maximilian Wilhelm <max@rfc2324.org> writes:
"We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to us."
That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context.
that's why I like to quote it...
I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't know any. Does anyone have a good example here?
That's going to be difficult. If you run a service for money, making it v6only will cost you a lot of market share, so everybody still needs to support IPv4 in that kind of business. You can only expect that on sites run without regard for money by some hyperenthusiastic hobbyists. And frequently enough, enthusiasm is a bad substitute for competence. Things change drastically however if you talk about internal networks. There you can at least sometimes only make the servers dual stacked but connect the bulk mass of clients to either v4 or v6 only.
Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up
No, don't give up. Try to be nice so they don't hold a grudge against you when the time comes, and then renegotiate your terms. Just make sure they don't blame you for not telling them. Sounds crazy, but that's how people sometimes tick: You tell them to watch out, they ignore you, things blow up in their face, so you should've warned---and protected---them, because after all you already knew beforehand.
What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high.
When do people go to the dentist? When they can't stand the pain anymore. Or put differently: "As far as I can tell, everything works for me. So why should I allocate some of my limited resources to this?"
From a technically challenged business perspective it makes perfect sense.
In some cases you might reason that fixing your WiFi takes at least three months (or whatever), will be necessary without prior warning, will incur significant extra cost and most importantly, also a loss/reduction of service lasting three months. Or put another way: If you wait until you notice that you're losing money, then you'll lose money. However: In most organizations management has got so used to being lied to with similar claims that they'll simply trust their own "experience". In other words: "As far as I can tell, everything works for me." Makes it rather hard to be heard. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Anno domini 2016 Benedikt Stockebrand scripsit:
Hi,
About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?"
Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers never ever to come back.
"*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!"
"We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to us."
That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context.
I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't know any. Does anyone have a good example here?
Not an example, but rather a dream - World IPv4 Outage Day ;-)
Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up
What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high. Don't anyone talk about diamonds now..
There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3].
And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running.
*sigh*
Where's that drain cleaner?
Best Max -- <@Cord> *gnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn* unsre kleine Servermanufaktur hat wieder zugeschlagen. <@Cord> Java-Update... nun auf dem 10ten Server... alles glatt gegangen. <@ixs> Cord: und das, meine damen und herren, ist warum sie automatisierung kaufen sollten. damit sie auch morgen noch kraftvoll adminstrieren koennen..
-- Hrant Dadivanyan (aka Ran d'Adi) hrant(at)dadivanyan.net /* "Feci quod potui, faciant meliora potentes." */ ran(at)psg.com
Hi Gert and list, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> writes:
I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least battery acid.
This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds?
if not that, then what else could we suggest without risking to be told "sir, I suggest you walk" next time you want to fly somehwere?
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
Shouldn't that be "have you disabled IPv4 on something today...?"? Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Hi, On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 05:03:35PM +0000, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote:
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? Shouldn't that be "have you disabled IPv4 on something today...?"?
Have we reached that point already? Must have missed that while fixing IPv6 stuff :-) - so yeah, let's turn off IPv4! Now! Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes: Hi,
Well many content providers / startups use "the cloud". No IPv6 there, no content.
Stopitstopitstopitstopit!
Seriously. Several people told me "If AWS doesn't offer IPv6 we don't need IPv6." On the other hand someone told me "our solution for IPv6 hosting is Amazon. Or some other cloud provider." Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Jens and list,
Seriously. Several people told me "If AWS doesn't offer IPv6 we don't need IPv6." On the other hand someone told me "our solution for IPv6 hosting is Amazon. Or some other cloud provider."
I had a somewhat similar experience with a customer not too long (not long enough?) ago. They used AWS/S3 for some relevant stuff, and since it was done externally it wasn't properly QAed. When Amazon switched IPv6 off again, they had a little bit of an issue. We only found out kind of accidentially, especially so because they didn't want to make it all that obvious that they are using Amazon. To my knowledge they are still trying to figure out where to move everything to, and how to do such a move seamlessly. Good News[TM] is that this was outside the scope of my responsibilities, but it was still rather frustrating. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes:
They used AWS/S3 for some relevant stuff, and since it was done externally it wasn't properly QAed. When Amazon switched IPv6 off again, they had a little bit of an issue. We only found out kind of accidentially, especially so because they didn't want to make it all that obvious that they are using Amazon.
Can't be that relevant if it was not monitored properly. Jens -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jenslink@quux.de | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Jens Link <jenslink@quux.de> wrote:
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes:
They used AWS/S3 for some relevant stuff, and since it was done externally it wasn't properly QAed. When Amazon switched IPv6 off again, they had a little bit of an issue. We only found out kind of accidentially, especially so because they didn't want to make it all that obvious that they are using Amazon.
Can't be that relevant if it was not monitored properly.
Your statement is true - but in the ideal world only... -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
Hi Jens and list, Jens Link <jenslink@quux.de> writes:
Benedikt Stockebrand <bs@stepladder-it.com> writes:
They used AWS/S3 for some relevant stuff, and since it was done externally it wasn't properly QAed. When Amazon switched IPv6 off again, they had a little bit of an issue. We only found out kind of accidentially, especially so because they didn't want to make it all that obvious that they are using Amazon.
Can't be that relevant if it was not monitored properly.
sorry, but I really can't publicly get into the details of that. Let's just say this was the tip of the iceberg, or the trailer of the TV series, or the reason I got so fond of drain cleaner... Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016, at 20:45, Sander Steffann wrote:
Hi,
Op 25 apr. 2016, om 19:35 heeft Silvia Hagen <silvia.hagen@sunny.ch> het volgende geschreven:
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-)
I have been doing some enterprise stuff as well recently. If there is going to be such a panel I would love to participate! :)
Any news ? It was supposed to be pushed to the next RIPE meeting. I would be also interested in participating. -- Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN
On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 2:00 AM, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN <ripe-wgs@radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:
That would be a great panel discussion with some diverse speakers on the panel :-)
I have been doing some enterprise stuff as well recently. If there is going to be such a panel I would love to participate! :)
Any news ? It was supposed to be pushed to the next RIPE meeting. I would be also interested in participating.
Unfortunately we could not organize it this time (due to some scheduling conflicts) but we keep it in mind for the next meeting... Sorry.. -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry
participants (13)
-
Benedikt Stockebrand -
christian bretterhofer -
Dennis Lundström -
Gert Doering -
Hrant Dadivanyan -
Ivan Pepelnjak -
Jen Linkova -
Jens Link -
Jens Link -
Maximilian Wilhelm -
Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN -
Sander Steffann -
Silvia Hagen