RIPE Atlas VM Anchors IPv6 only support?
Hello, On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 at 15:35, Alun Davies <adavies@ripe.net> wrote:
We just this morning published an article announcing that, as of today, we are accepting applications for anyone interested in hosting RIPE Atlas VM anchors. The article points you to all the information you’ll need to apply for and install a virtual anchor:
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/alun_davies/announcing-ripe-atlas-vm-anchors
I was reading through the list of requirements for hosting RIPE Atlas VM Anchors as of Nov 2021. • https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/anchor-installation-vm/ • https://atlas.ripe.net/legal/anchors/memorandum/
Network-wise, RIPE Atlas VM anchors have the following requirements: • The anchor must have native IPv4 and IPv6 (if IPv6 is announced in the host ASN) • Static IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be unfiltered (not firewalled) • The VM anchor may require up to 10 Mbit bandwidth (it currently requires much less)
From the requirements, I glean if a network is not able to provide an unfiltered/non-firewalled IPv6 address to the VM. IPv6 is not a requirement if not used within the applying host ASN. Only an unfiltered public IPv4 address is.
What about the reverse situation? ↪ I.e. the host ASN applying for hosting a VM Anchor is an IPv6-only ASN. Not utilizing IPv4 in the ASN. Therefore not able to provide an unfiltered IPv4 address to the VM? To my current understanding, the latter example is an instant disqualification if applying for hosting a RIPE Atlas VM Anchor? /Chriztoffer
Hi, On 24/11/2021 12:08, Chriztoffer Hansen wrote:
Hello,
On Thu, 8 Nov 2018 at 15:35, Alun Davies <adavies@ripe.net> wrote:
We just this morning published an article announcing that, as of today, we are accepting applications for anyone interested in hosting RIPE Atlas VM anchors. The article points you to all the information you’ll need to apply for and install a virtual anchor:
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/alun_davies/announcing-ripe-atlas-vm-anchors I was reading through the list of requirements for hosting RIPE Atlas VM Anchors as of Nov 2021.
• https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/anchor-installation-vm/ • https://atlas.ripe.net/legal/anchors/memorandum/
Network-wise, RIPE Atlas VM anchors have the following requirements: • The anchor must have native IPv4 and IPv6 (if IPv6 is announced in the host ASN) • Static IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be unfiltered (not firewalled) • The VM anchor may require up to 10 Mbit bandwidth (it currently requires much less) From the requirements, I glean if a network is not able to provide an unfiltered/non-firewalled IPv6 address to the VM. IPv6 is not a requirement if not used within the applying host ASN. Only an unfiltered public IPv4 address is.
What about the reverse situation? ↪ I.e. the host ASN applying for hosting a VM Anchor is an IPv6-only ASN. Not utilizing IPv4 in the ASN. Therefore not able to provide an unfiltered IPv4 address to the VM?
To my current understanding, the latter example is an instant disqualification if applying for hosting a RIPE Atlas VM Anchor?
Currently, this is indeed the case. It is however in our plans to support an IPv6-only option. The biggest changes needed are in our monitoring, the installation process and our deploy as anchor process. Technically, AFAIK, there are no roadblocks anymore. We could make this a higher priority if more people indicate they would want to see this option. Kind regards, Johan ter Beest RIPE Atlas team
/Chriztoffer
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 10:18, Johan ter Beest <jterbeest@ripe.net> wrote:
It is however in our plans to support an IPv6-only option.
The biggest changes needed are in our monitoring, the installation process and our deploy as anchor process.
Technically, AFAIK, there are no roadblocks anymore.
We could make this a higher priority if more people indicate they would want to see this option.
Personally, I am happy knowing it is on your roadmap. Would you be willing to share which quarterly roadmap you are _planning_ to add "v6-only option" to? Or at which time in the future you are likely to announce updates regarding this bullet point? /Chriztoffer
Hi, On 13/12/2021 12:08, Chriztoffer Hansen wrote:
On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 10:18, Johan ter Beest <jterbeest@ripe.net> wrote:
It is however in our plans to support an IPv6-only option.
The biggest changes needed are in our monitoring, the installation process and our deploy as anchor process.
Technically, AFAIK, there are no roadblocks anymore.
We could make this a higher priority if more people indicate they would want to see this option. Personally, I am happy knowing it is on your roadmap. Good to know :)
Would you be willing to share which quarterly roadmap you are _planning_ to add "v6-only option" to? Or at which time in the future you are likely to announce updates regarding this bullet point?
It's on my roadmap for Q1 of 2022 but I cannot make any promises about updates or when it will be ready as it involves multiple departments. Johan
/Chriztoffer
participants (2)
-
Chriztoffer Hansen -
Johan ter Beest