May 2000 - lir-wg - mailman.ripe.net

RE: Warning about the size of the NEXT message
by Jorma Mellin 16 May '00

16 May '00

>Or HTML which is readable by even more systems than PDF. >It's usually a 'one-mouse-click' action to create a proper HTML file >within this M$ word app and you're done. This M$ stuff shows how well these GSM people understand the way the Internet community works. And yet they are pleading addresses. I wonder why they are so keen to have publicly routable address space (from IPv4!) but not so worried about public AS numbers. To my ears this sounds that they haven't really though about this enough. Jorma Mellin ---------------------------------------------------------- jorma.mellin(a)teliafi.net Development Manager ; CCIE#4185 Telia Finland Inc, Network Services

2 1

Warning about the size of the NEXT message
by Vesna Manojlovic 16 May '00

16 May '00

Dear list members, Please be aware that the next message coming to the list has a Word document attachment. The attachment is rather large. It is not our practice to allow such huge messages to go to the list. We tried to find an alternative way of posting it; however, due to lack of time we did not succeed. It is important that this message reaches lir-wg before the RIPE meeting. The message is from Adrian Pauling, and the subject is "IP Adddressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment". Apologies once more for not being able to approve it to the list in any other way. Regards, Vesna Manojlovic RIPE NCC lists moderator

6 5

Re: IP Adddressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment
by Hank Nussbacher 15 May '00

15 May '00

At 16:15 10/05/00 +0100, you wrote: Can you explain why it was sent on May 10 and only hit the list on May 15? -Hank >Ladies & Gentlemen, > >At the RIPE35 meeting there was some debate regarding the requirements for >IP addressing by the GPRS Mobile technology. A small working group was >formed, and subsequently some progress has been made. The attachment >provides more information, and will be of interest to those attending the >LIR-WG at RIPE36. > <<Working_Party_Briefing_paper_GPRS_addressing.doc>> > >> Regards, >> >> Adrian F Pauling >> :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager >> acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture >> AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC >> * adrian.pauling(a)bt.com >> * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 >

2 1

RE: IP Addressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment
by adrian.pauling＠bt.com 15 May '00

15 May '00

Hank & LIR-WG, there was a delay due to the size of the attachment, which invoked the lists moderator, whilst the size and necessity of mailing such a file to the list were checked. The issue of IP Addressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment started at RIPE 35 and will be further discussed at RIPE 36. If time had permitted a more appropriate document format and probably web based URL for people to gain the information if they desired. My unreserved apologies for sending the file(s) in a proprietary document format - I was having trouble saving the embedded files as html. My thanks to Hans Petter Holen as LIR-WG Chair for providing a URL of the minutes, and James Aldridge of KPNQwest whose URL contains all the relevant details and document(s). Regards, Adrian F Pauling :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC * adrian.pauling(a)bt.com * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 British Telecommunications plc Registered Office 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ Registered in England no 1800000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Hank Nussbacher [SMTP:hank@att.net.il] > Sent: 15 May 2000 13:46 > To: adrian.pauling(a)bt.com > Cc: lir-wg(a)ripe.net > Subject: Re: IP Adddressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment > > At 16:15 10/05/00 +0100, you wrote: > > Can you explain why it was sent on May 10 and only hit the list on May 15? > > -Hank > > >Ladies & Gentlemen, > > > >At the RIPE35 meeting there was some debate regarding the requirements > for > >IP addressing by the GPRS Mobile technology. A small working group was > >formed, and subsequently some progress has been made. The attachment > >provides more information, and will be of interest to those attending the > >LIR-WG at RIPE36. > > <<Working_Party_Briefing_paper_GPRS_addressing.doc>> > > > >> Regards, > >> > >> Adrian F Pauling > >> :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager > >> acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture > >> AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC > >> * adrian.pauling(a)bt.com > >> * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 > >

1 0

IP Adddressing & GPRS Mobile Technology deployment
by adrian.pauling＠bt.com 15 May '00

15 May '00

Ladies & Gentlemen, At the RIPE35 meeting there was some debate regarding the requirements for IP addressing by the GPRS Mobile technology. A small working group was formed, and subsequently some progress has been made. The attachment provides more information, and will be of interest to those attending the LIR-WG at RIPE36. <<Working_Party_Briefing_paper_GPRS_addressing.doc>> > Regards, > > Adrian F Pauling > :-)NEL2C Internet Protocol Manager > acd Information Systems Engineering Technical Architecture > AFP1-RIPE / AFP-ARIN / AFP25-InterNIC > * adrian.pauling(a)bt.com > * +44 19 2685 1992 / +44 78 0290 4877 > British Telecommunications plc > Registered Office 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ > Registered in England no 1800000

3 2

Action list and Draft minutes v1 LIR-WG 35
by Hans Petter Holen 15 May '00

15 May '00

I have now updated my "Work in progress" pages available from the LIR-WG pages http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/lir/index.html The draft minutes as produced by Paul Tate from the RIPE NCC has been made available http://home.sol.no/~hph/RIPE/RIPE%2035%20minutes.htm My slides from the meeting http://home.sol.no/~hph/RIPE/LIR%20WG%2035_files/frame.htm and my report to the plenary http://home.sol.no/~hph/RIPE/LIR%20WG%2035%20plenary%20report-filer/frame.ht m Please submit comments and corrections to me or the list. The huge delay is entirely my fault. Many thanks to Paul for producing the minutes ! Action list: Action Owner Status Description 35.1 Chair Publish policy document 35.2 Chair Publish election procedure 35.3 WG Subscribe lir-wg 35.4 NCC PGP Key exchange procedure 35.5 NCC Implement PGP for hostmaster mail 35.6 NCC Make db checking tool available for self audit 35.7 Chair Task Force on addresses to GPRS infrastructure -hph

1 0

Draft Agenda v 2
by Hans Petter Holen 15 May '00

15 May '00

Dear Working Group, I am terribly sorry I am so late with the preparations for next weeks RIPE meeting. This is mainly due to unforseen events on my side. Please find below a draft agenda for our upcoming working group meeting. The first version of this was presented to the plenary at the last RIPE meeting. I have removed item 6 the report from the address council item as this will be presented to the ICANN open meeting on friday. Be aware that I have not gone trough the mailinglist lately to se if there has been any requests there for items to be added. Pleas drop me a note if there are any other items that ought to be on the agenda. 1. Admin -scribe, participant list, charter, mailinglists 2. Agenda 3. Meet the RIPE NCC hostmasters 4. RIPE 35 - minutes - actions 5. Reports from the Registries - RIPE NCC - APNIC - ARIN - ICANN - Status of the Latin and AFRI NiCs 7. Presentations of candidates 8. Microallocations in the ARIN region. 9. IP addresses to GPRS infrastructure. 10. Interim report from the ICANN ad Hoc group 11. Minimum Allocation 12. Name-based webhosting Yours, Hans Petter Holen Local IR Working group Chair. ---- Hans Petter Holen, VP New Products, Scandinavia Online mailto:hph@a.sol.no Phone: +47 88 00 39 16

1 0

Summary: IP assignment for virtual webhosting
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 12 May '00

12 May '00

-from the http side of view, it's ok to use name based vhosts -problem: accounting There is no software package to do an !reliable! accounting on a name-based basis, Accounting per IP works fine Possible solution is a sniffer. this requires an extra machine (and perhaps a second machine more for analyzing the collected data) and perhaps changes in the network layout. There is no software package to do this. -problem: bandwidth management Bandwidth management on an ip + service based environment is possible and not tooooo complicated. For the http part, there are some packages for apache, but they have not all features needed and you cannot manage badwith for other services than http. -problem: moving vhosts DNS is not fast enough, the possible solution with a redirect to a new www2-host doesnt work in all cases. So i think it is not possible to use only one ip per machine and doing only name based hosting. I think our way with one IP per customer (NOT per vhost) is an acceptable compromise. I won't be at the RIPE-Meeting. Could someone please point out a summary of our discussion? Greetings from Germany Henning Brauer Hostmaster BSWS ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5

3 2

Re: IP assignment for virtual webhosting
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 11 May '00

11 May '00

There was a solution for this on this list a few days ago... How to move a hostname based virtual webserver: I have to webservers A and B (10.0.0.1) and (10.0.0.2) and want to move site www.cust.com from A to B The config on A is at the moment <VirtualHost 10.0.0.1> ServerName www.cust.com DocumentRoot ... </VirtualHost> Now move the data to B, change the nameserver entry for www.cust.com to point to 10.0.0.2 and create a www2.cust.com also to point to 10.0.0.2. The config file on B becomes <VirtualHost 10.0.0.2> ServerName www.cust.com ServerAlias www2.cust.com DocumentRoot ... </VirtualHost> and the config on A becomes <VirtualHost 10.0.0.1> ServerName www.cust.com Redirect / http://www2.cust.com/ </VirtualHost> So all request still coming in into A are redirected to the new name www2 (no DNS cache) and the DNS servers that are up to date go directly to B. Wait some time and remove the www2 entry from the DNS and clean up the config files. ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE Daniel Roesen <noc@entire-sy To: lir-wg(a)ripe.net stems.com> cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: IP assignment for virtual webhosting owner-lir-wg@r ipe.net 11.05.00 16:27 On Thu, May 11, 2000 at 04:09:45PM +0200, Herbert Baerten wrote: > And I agree with Daniel that accounting is a very important issue here. > Security is another one, firewalls being configured based on source and > destination IP addresses. And another (although minor) point: you loose flexibilty. Situation: you want to move a bunch of domains hosted on server A to another server B because of system load or whatever. With name-based vhosting you have to do the usual DNS changes and wait for DNS convergency (DNS cache timeouts) to start the move. With IP-based vhosting you can act in minutes. Move config over to server B, take down IP on server A, activate IP on server B and you're set. This means in the name-based vhosting case i have about a week (usual RR TTL) before being able to react on the slashdot effect in contrary to IP-based vhosting where I'm able to react in minutes. I already saw several well known sites suffering from exactly THIS problem. Especially for companies like us with very limited upstream bandwidth. Best regards, Daniel Roesen Entire Systems NOC -- Entire Systems Network Operations Center noc(a)entire-systems.com Entire Systems GmbH - Ferbachstrasse 12 - 56203 Hoehr-Grenzhausen, Germany InterNIC-Handle: ES1238-ORG RIPE-Handle: ESN10-RIPE Tel: +49 2624 9550-55 GnuPG/PGP Key-ID: 0xBF3C40C9 http://www.entire-systems.com/noc/noc-key.asc GnuPG/PGP Fingerprint: 1F3F B675 1A38 D87C EB3C 6090 C6B9 DF48 BF3C 40C9

3 3

Re: IP assignment for virtual webhosting
by henning.brauer＠bsmail.de 11 May '00

11 May '00

Mike, this was a bit misunderstandable as i wrote a few hours ago. traffic management is most important for different services than for different vservers. our "add an module..." requires a) to write such a module (i do not have the time and the knowledge to do so) and b) doesn't solve the problems pointed out here before (ip paket sizes for expample). if you could have a look to our server farm you would see that the "adding hardware" aproach is not our way. ------------------------------------------------ BS Web Services Roedingsmarkt 14 20459 Hamburg Germany info(a)bsmail.de www.bsws.de fon: +49 40 3750357-0 fax: +49 40 3750357-5 PLEASE USE EMAIL WHERE POSSIBLE Miquel van Smoorenburg To: henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de <miquels@cist cc: "lir-wg(a)ripe.net" <lir-wg(a)ripe.net> ron.nl> Subject: Re: IP assignment for virtual webhosting 11.05.00 17:04 According to henning.brauer(a)bsmail.de: > Yes, that exactly the way we do it. If I imagine the power needed to > implement this its nearly impossible to reimpleent for ONLY name-based > Virtual Hosts. Add an apache log module that measures the actual bytes sent out (file size + HTTP headers) - accounting problem solved. > And if you think of Bandwith management - i don't see any > way to do this on an per name-basis, only per ip (and service) is possible > as far as I know. To use Bandwidth mangement on named vhosts-basis, you > would have to read out the FULL ip-header and service-specific headers on > the router...i think this is not possible without enormous CPU-power and > would give high delays on the router. Use the Apache module mod_bandwidth, or something similar. People tend to buy and install enormous amounts of hardware, solving problems by adding more boxes. While fixing the software is simpler, easier and faster. Mike.

1 0