Thought this off-list reply would be of interest to many here:
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 1:43 PM, Daniel G. Kluge wrote:
Hello Ray,
on the Subject on DHCPv6 for MacOS, there were some discussions on the
IPv6-dev lists on Apple, with the usual comment from Apple engineers, that
they are not
TJ wrote:
It is still the router, a piece of managed infrastructure sending out the
information - not like we are encouraging hosts to make up their own prefix
info here ... and hosts choosing the low-order bits shouldn't matter that
much.
But that's the fatal flaw of autoconfiguration. Hosts
On Oct 17, 2009, at 8:55 PM, Ray Soucy wrote:
Looking for general feedback on IPv6 deployment to the edge.
As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge in an academic setting has
been a challenge. Common wisdom says to rely on SLAAC for IPv6
addressing, and in a perfect world it would make
Thanks for the response, if only to force me put my thoughts down into words.
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Steven Bellovin s...@cs.columbia.edu wrote:
...
My question is this: what are your goals? What are you trying to achieve?
Force all authorized machines to register? If so, why?
On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 01:29:54PM -0400, TJ wrote:
You say hacks, others see it as relatively-speaking simple additions of more
functionality.
You can define any options you want for DHCPv6, write a draft and get
community support.
I don't see how that (continuously evolving DHCPv6 hacks) is
Looking for general feedback on IPv6 deployment to the edge.
As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge in an academic setting has
been a challenge. Common wisdom says to rely on SLAAC for IPv6
addressing, and in a perfect world it would make sense.
Given that historically we have relied
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge in an academic setting has
been a challenge. Common wisdom says to rely on SLAAC for IPv6
addressing, and in a perfect world it would make sense.
Ray,
Common wisdom says that?
Our
I thought someone had to respond to router solicitations for stateless
autoconfig of global scope addresses to happen. On Linux you just
don't run the radvd. On Cisco I think it's something like ipv6 nd
suppress-ra in the interface config. Does that fail to prevent
stateless autoconfig? Or is
On 18/10/2009, at 2:28 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 8:55 PM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge in an academic setting
has
been a challenge. Common wisdom says to rely on SLAAC for IPv6
addressing, and in a perfect world it would
On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 20:55 -0400, Ray Soucy wrote:
making use of SLAAC. The concern here is that older hosts with less
than OK implementations will still enable IPv6 without regard for the
stability and security concerns associated with IPv6.
Some hosts - very dumb ones or very old ones,
On Sat, 17 Oct 2009, Ray Soucy wrote:
Given that historically we have relied on DHCP for a means of NAC and
host registration, like many academic institutions, the idea of sweeping
changes to accommodate IPv6 was just not going to happen in the near
future.
IETF has historically dropped the
.
What's folks experience in rolling this out the the customer ... be it DHCP
or SLAAC?? Also from a BBA perspective??
On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Ray Soucy r...@maine.edu wrote:
Looking for general feedback on IPv6 deployment to the edge.
As it turns out delivering IPv6 to the edge
We uploaded another interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrE1TEan4Jo
To make sure we cover as many areas of the industry as possible, we
asked Patrik Fältström on the role of government in IPv6 deployment.
Patrik is Senior Consulting Engineer with Cisco, but has served as an
advisor
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud
to announce the second in a series of interviews.
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU
So far, we have
Am 12.06.2009 um 19:05 schrieb Arno Meulenkamp:
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud
to announce the second in a series of interviews.
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Arno Meulenkamp wrote:
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face training
and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud to announce the
second in a series of interviews.
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http
On 12 Jun 2009, at 19:29 , Marc Manthey wrote:
thanks but thats not Randy Bush its Andy Davidson
Randy Bushs Video is here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM
you are right!
guess that tells me that cutting and pasting is dangerous.. thanks! :)
Arno
PGP.sig
Description: This
the second in a series of interviews.
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU
So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about their
experiences and are very busy editing all the video material. In the
coming months, you will be able
Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU
Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
different.
Marvelous technologies of these days ...
Cheers
Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
different.
it was the duct tape
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Randy Bushra...@psg.com wrote:
Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
different.
it was the duct tape
He, he, BTW your interview was really good.
Hope some folks get the point that besides many of the challenges to
transition to
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, I am proud to
announce the first in a series of interviews.
Andy Davidson of NetSumo ISP Consultancy discusses the IPv6 deployment
they have done for their customers
deployment at both global and local
levels. Our conclusions can be summarized by the following three points:
1.) IPv6 deployment is not seen as a pressing issue.
2.) We saw a lack of meaningful IPv6 traffic (mostly DNS/Domain and ICMP
messages), possibly indicating that IPv6 networks are still
University), and Aman Shaikh (ATT
Research), we studied the extent of IPv6 deployment at both global and local
levels. Our conclusions can be summarized by the following three points:
1.) IPv6 deployment is not seen as a pressing issue.
2.) We saw a lack of meaningful IPv6 traffic (mostly DNS/Domain
Shaikh (ATT
Research), we studied the extent of IPv6 deployment at both global and local
levels. Our conclusions can be summarized by the following three points:
1.) IPv6 deployment is not seen as a pressing issue.
Agreed. SPs are driven by customers. Customers, generally, still want the
IPv4
deployment at both global and local levels. Our conclusions can be summarized by
the following three points:
1.) IPv6 deployment is not seen as a pressing issue.
2.) We saw a lack of meaningful IPv6 traffic (mostly DNS/Domain and ICMP
messages), possibly indicating that IPv6 networks are still
On 29/04/2009, at 5:30 AM, Harald Firing Karlsen wrote:
Please check out the following link with some information/statistics
from a LAN-party taking place in Norway (yeah, Norway is in Europe,
not North America, but it stills give an overview):
http://technet.gathering.org/?p=121
There
Hello everyone. My name is Elliott Karpilovsky, a student at Princeton
University. In collaboration with Alex Gerber (ATT Research), Dan Pei (ATT
Research), Jennifer Rexford (Princeton University), and Aman Shaikh (ATT
Research), we studied the extent of IPv6 deployment at both global and local
Donald Stahl wrote:
If ARIN is going to assign /48's, and people are blocking anything
longer than /32- well then that's a problem :)
To be specific, ARIN is currently assigning up to /48 out of
2620::/23.
I noticed that http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
has the following
what problem is it that IPv6 is actually supposed to solve?
that's an easy one. in 1993-5, the press was screaming that we were
about to run out of ip space. a half-assed design was released. the
press stopped screaming. victory was declared, everyone went home.
and, as usual, ops and
Most of those features were completely gone by 1995
TLAs et alia lasted until 2000+. and i think anycast is still broken,
though we can at least ignore it and use v4-style anycast, which turns
out to be what we need.
leaving larger address space as the sole practical benefit and no
actual
i think anycast is still broken, though we can at least ignore it and
use v4-style anycast, which turns out to be what we need.
recant
i am told by a good friend who lurks that this was actually fixed a year
or two ago. a team of ops-oriented folk were sufficiently persistent
and strident to
At 6:28 PM -0700 5/30/07, Randy Bush wrote:
well, you get two points for copping to it. i lay on the train tracks
and was squashed.
Well, I became a contentious objector... (RFC1669). One can
confirm a real sense of humor to the cosmos, because I now
get to be lead advocate for the very
On Wed, 30 May 2007 18:52:12 PDT, Randy Bush said:
i think anycast is still broken, though we can at least ignore it and
use v4-style anycast, which turns out to be what we need.
recant
i am told by a good friend who lurks that this was actually fixed a year
or two ago. a team of
We do have dual stack in all our customer sites, and at the time being
didn't got complains or support calls that may be considered due to the
.
So far everyone who has contacted me has generally reported a positive
experience with their transitions.
The biggest complaints so far have
301 - 335 of 335 matches
Mail list logo
