Slides from the plenary
mostly-PDF versions of presentations have been uploaded to the following URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/nov2004-washington/ Enjoy! ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Mobility (Was: Re: A modest proposal for Harald)
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: > But on mobility, I think we blew it. Not sure if you are referring to the mobile IP technology in particular, but because I suspect that the following is a bit of a secret to the larger community, mobile IPv4 is actually deployed and used. And end users mostly don't even know it! Excluding cdma 2000, I'm told that it is deployed in O(100K) nodes. This is in roaming notebooks and handhelds. Looking forward, this number could get substantially larger, should appropriate ROHC profiles be developed, though that work has not been started AFAIK. Looking at cdma 2000 (aka 3GPP2), it is deployed in cellphones in both Sprint PCS and Nextel. In such phones, when IP service is enabled, mobile IP is used. I'm told that MIP is deployed in O(million) devices here (i.e, there is O(10M) subscribers, though it is unclear how many are also subscribed to IP service). There are some other deployments, but I don't know how big. Thomas ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 05:32:39PM -0500, Brett Thorson wrote: > Sorry to send this back to this list. But if people are having problems, > I would encourage them (as well as yourself) to come to the NOC (at any > IETF, this one or any future IETF). That way we can ask questions like > "What is your MAC address" and offer a solution as quick as possible. > > In any case, the solution, as far as we can tell, is that your ability to > receive DHCP offers on your linux system is broken. Not sure if I should take this to the list either. But I think what you see there is the requests made from windows. I switched to windows because that worked. > Here are the logs. If you have more issues, I highly encourage you to > either take the problem to a "Trouble with DHCP on linux list" or come to > the NOC to continue the exploration. It works for other Linux users I've talked to, but they may not be using dhcpcd. I'm told dhcpcd has some bugs which I'm willing to believe. I don't have the time to research this now. I might be interested in hearing from others, in private, that are using dhcpcd whether they have problems. I may stop by the NOC, but it's no big deal. I should have done so earlier in the week. Stig ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
Hi Brett, May be is even easier to setup a [EMAIL PROTECTED] ? Just a suggestion, some of us get really crazy during this week to have additional time for going "physically" into the NOC. Regards, Jordi > De: "Brett Thorson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Fecha: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:32:39 -0500 (EST) > Para: "Stig Venaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Asunto: Re: IPv6 in the network, please > > Sorry to send this back to this list. But if people are having problems, > I would encourage them (as well as yourself) to come to the NOC (at any > IETF, this one or any future IETF). That way we can ask questions like > "What is your MAC address" and offer a solution as quick as possible. > > In any case, the solution, as far as we can tell, is that your ability to > receive DHCP offers on your linux system is broken. > > Here are the logs. If you have more issues, I highly encourage you to > either take the problem to a "Trouble with DHCP on linux list" or come to > the NOC to continue the exploration. > > Cheers! > > Nov 8 15:27:52 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:27:53 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:35 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:36 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:43 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:43 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:29:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:32:32 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > > > Nov 8 15:32:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 130.129.134.174 > (130.129.16.20) from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:32:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPACK on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:53:21 (none) dhcpd: DHCPRELEASE of 130.129.134.174 from > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 (found) > Nov 8 15:53:32 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via > 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 130.129.134.174 > (130.129.16.20) from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPACK on 130.129.134.174 to > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 > Nov 8 16:17:19 (none) dhcpd: DHCPRELEASE of 130.129.134.174 from > 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.12 > > --Brett > > > >> On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:18:31PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: >>> Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. >> >> Not for me. But interestingly, I've never been able to get an IPv4 > address (or any responses) to DHCP queries from dhcpcd-1.3.22_p4 on Linux > on the v4 network. However, I managed to get a response and an IPv4 > address on the IETF61IPv6 network. >> >> Stig >> >> ___ >> Ietf mailing list >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf >> > > > > > > > ___ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > ** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line at: http://www.ipv6-es.com This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Yahoo is not using ESMTP
Should ISP's increase the minimum acceptable attachment size to 10M? If anything this will burden the Internet even more. Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Yahoo is not using ESMTP
Hi all, I'm not sure where to bring this information and any help would be most appreciated. I have noticed that yahoo mail is using SMTP and not ESMTP. This is quite an issue in bandwidth saving as now the size limit for mail on yahoo is 10MB if I'm not mistaken. In many places in the world we limit our e-mail size to 2MB or less. By having yahoo to use SMTP our servers are obliged to receive the whole 10MB before the mailer can reply back size too big. This is also an issue that could be brought to the SMTP group, to know if you can stop the Data stream to reply an error message, as you may know from the beginning of the data stream you will not accept the e-mail. For instance I also check the body early to see if it has not any forbidden attachment. I think the moment the protocol states that you have to wait for the . in the DATA to reply back with an error message? Finally is it feasible to refuse mail from SMTP mailers only? What the standards are saying? Here are some packet capture. Gmail and hotmail follows ESMTP but yahoo follows SMTP. 220 cobalt.sopac.org.fj ESMTP Postfix. EHLO mproxy.gmail.com. 250-cobalt.sopac.org.fj. 250-PIPELINING. 250-SIZE 150. 250-VRFY. 250-ETRN. 250 8BITMIME. 220 cobalt.sopac.org.fj ESMTP Postfix. EHLO bay0-pcs1.bay0.hotmail.com. 250-cobalt.sopac.org.fj. 250-PIPELINING. 250-SIZE 150. 250-VRFY. 250-ETRN. 250 8BITMIME. MAIL From:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> SIZE=946. 220 cobalt.sopac.org.fj ESMTP Postfix. HELO web8407.mail.in.yahoo.com. 250 cobalt.sopac.org.fj. Thanks all for helping us in the Pacific Islands to save our costly bandwidth. Cheers Franck Martin Vice-Chair PICISOC (Pacific Islands Chapter of the Internet Society) www.picisoc.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
Sorry to send this back to this list. But if people are having problems, I would encourage them (as well as yourself) to come to the NOC (at any IETF, this one or any future IETF). That way we can ask questions like "What is your MAC address" and offer a solution as quick as possible. In any case, the solution, as far as we can tell, is that your ability to receive DHCP offers on your linux system is broken. Here are the logs. If you have more issues, I highly encourage you to either take the problem to a "Trouble with DHCP on linux list" or come to the NOC to continue the exploration. Cheers! Nov 8 15:27:52 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:27:53 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:35 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:36 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:43 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:43 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:29:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:30:59 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:32:32 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:32:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 130.129.134.174 (130.129.16.20) from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:32:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPACK on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:53:21 (none) dhcpd: DHCPRELEASE of 130.129.134.174 from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 (found) Nov 8 15:53:32 (none) dhcpd: DHCPDISCOVER from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPOFFER on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPREQUEST for 130.129.134.174 (130.129.16.20) from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 15:53:33 (none) dhcpd: DHCPACK on 130.129.134.174 to 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.129.128.80 Nov 8 16:17:19 (none) dhcpd: DHCPRELEASE of 130.129.134.174 from 00:05:4e:40:17:62 (silkesvarten) via 130.12 --Brett > On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:18:31PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: >> Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. > > Not for me. But interestingly, I've never been able to get an IPv4 address (or any responses) to DHCP queries from dhcpcd-1.3.22_p4 on Linux on the v4 network. However, I managed to get a response and an IPv4 address on the IETF61IPv6 network. > > Stig > > ___ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
This is probably already inappropriate to the IETF list, but to be fair to the admin folks... On Wed, 10 Nov 2004, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: BUT the routing to Europe is really stupid and absolutely unacceptable: [...] Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:/Users/Jordi/Desktop jordi$ traceroute6 www.euro6ix.org traceroute6 to www.euro6ix.org (2001:800:40:2a03::3) from 2001:468:c12:136:20d:93ff:feeb:73, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 2001:468:c12:136::4 2.491 ms 1.672 ms 1.641 ms 2 2001:468:c12:1::1 2.353 ms 2.463 ms 2.387 ms 3 2001:468:ff:185c::1 17.22 ms * 3.112 ms 4 atlang-washng.abilene.abilene.ucaid.edu 21.407 ms 18.55 ms 18.519 ms 5 hstnng-atlang.abilene.ucaid.edu 44.552 ms 43.544 ms 38.279 ms 6 losang-hstnng.abilene.ucaid.edu 69.868 ms 69.807 ms * 7 3ffe:8140:101:1::2 178.257 ms 173.559 ms 174.291 ms 8 hitachi1.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 175.771 ms 174.657 ms 173.76 ms 9 pc6.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 195.116 ms 183.588 ms 190.05 ms 10 * 3ffe:1800::3:2d0:b7ff:fe9a:6233 185.624 ms 183.481 ms 11 3ffe:1800::3:230:48ff:fe41:4e95 184.689 ms 183.501 ms 184.908 ms 12 2001:468:ff:16c1::5 183.309 ms 184.138 ms 194.804 ms 13 v6-tunnel62-uk6x.ipv6.btexact.com 457.111 ms 456.848 ms 455.127 ms 14 2001:800:40:2e02::1 513.549 ms 511.013 ms 515.763 ms 15 2001:800:40:2f02::2 514.232 ms 512.886 ms 520.444 ms 16 ns1.euro6ix.com 520.54 ms 516.964 ms 510.757 ms Can we please fix this, PLEASE ? No idea why hasn't been fixed already since when reported on Monday, in parallel with the rest. What is the exact thing you're complaining about? The fact that you use an ISP which you use (or some of its upstreams) hasn't set up sufficient peering/transit? :) It surely looks like a problem at UK6x or the first hop ISP.. Internet2 connectivity is reasonably good. To be fair, this is not the right place to blame for this inoptimal routing. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oykingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Budget numbers for IETF, 2005
FYI - we (Leslie and Harald) have made a projection of the overall IETF administrative cost and meeting revenue for 2005. While the IETF community is refining its plans for how it handles its administrative future, the ISOC annual budgeting process is upon us. We needed to provide some input to ISOC about the IETF's 2005 financial reality: on our current trajectory, we will be impacting their 2005 budget differently than 2004. The projections were made on the assumptions: - Secretariat functions cost as much in 2005 as it did in 2004 - Meetings cost roughly the same as in 2004 - Attendance at meetings remains around 1300 people per meeting - We hire the IETF Admin Director on Jan 1 or thereabouts - We substantially expand the funds available to the RFC Editor, to speed up processing (based on an increase in approved RFCs over the last few years). The assumptions are VERY rough. Furthermore, they will have to be revised by the IASA transition team, and ultimately by the IAOC as they pull together more data and make choices for 2005. Under those assumptions, the IETF budget balances if meeting fees remain at USD 500, and ISOC provides approx USD 1.4 million for the IETF and RFC Editor functions. This proposal is currently in front of the ISOC Board, and may see modification based on their budget process. Harald All values in thousands Operations 2005 Projection IETF Meeting costs $1,364 Secretariat 757 IAD 183 (including benefits) Office space 12 Financial & legal 60 Insurance 16 IETF/IAB discretionary 84 -- 2,476 RFC Editor 802 -- Total: $3,278 Transition Expenses 2005 Projection Add'l legal & fin $ 40 Tools devel/adjust100 -- Total: $ 140 Total 2005 expenses: $3,418 == Meeting Fees 2005 Projection Meeting revenue $2,048 (assuming 1300 attendees/meeting) -- Total: $2,048 == Shortfall/Total ISOC support: $1,370 ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
I am in International E, without v6 on WLAN, but can v4 ssh home and trace from there to the v6 router here. Then I see VERY good response over the JANET-GEANT-Abilene-IETF route. Maybe it's a Euro6IX issue for you, for specific routing to that prefix as opposed to the production prefix, if GEANT does offer transit for you? (You might try asking to [EMAIL PROTECTED]) login ~]$ /usr/sbin/traceroute6 2001:468:c12:1::1 traceroute to 2001:468:c12:1::1 (2001:468:c12:1::1) from 2001:630:d0:115:230:48ff:fe23:58df, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets 1 servers-router.6core.ecs.soton.ac.uk (2001:630:d0:115::1) 0.431 ms 0.276 ms 0.275 ms 2 zaphod.6core.ecs.soton.ac.uk (2001:630:d0:101::1) 0.841 ms 0.527 ms 0.706 ms 3 ford.6core.ecs.soton.ac.uk (2001:630:d0:100::1) 0.99 ms 0.975 ms 1.668 ms 4 2001:630:c1:100::1 (2001:630:c1:100::1) 1.309 ms 1.411 ms 0.952 ms 5 2001:630:c1:10::1 (2001:630:c1:10::1) 2.855 ms 1.851 ms 2.023 ms 6 * * * 7 2001:630:c1::1 (2001:630:c1::1) 3.35 ms 2.651 ms 2.379 ms 8 2001:630:c1::1 (2001:630:c1::1) 2.338 ms 3.192 ms 2.778 ms 9 po9-0.cosh-scr.ja.net (2001:630:0:10::85) 79.361 ms 3.606 ms 3.264 ms 10 po2-0.lond-scr.ja.net (2001:630:0:10::29) 5.147 ms 5.02 ms 7.123 ms 11 po6-0.lond-scr3.ja.net (2001:630:0:10::36) 5.306 ms 4.906 ms 5.095 ms 12 2001:630:0:10::166 (2001:630:0:10::166) 5.447 ms 4.241 ms 4.248 ms 13 janet.uk1.uk.geant.net (2001:798:2028:10aa::1) 5.798 ms 5.709 ms 5.006 ms 14 uk.ny1.ny.geant.net (2001:798:20cc:1c01:2801::1) 74.333 ms 74.8 ms 73.537 ms 15 nycmng-esnet.abilene.ucaid.edu (2001:468:ff:15c3::1) 78.41 ms 128.5 ms 74.054 ms 16 washng-nycmng.abilene.ucaid.edu (2001:468:ff:1518::2) 101.141 ms 95.373 ms 96.015 ms 17 max-washng.abilene.ucaid.edu (2001:468:ff:184c::2) 95.498 ms 94.944 ms 94.517 ms 18 2001:468:c12:1::1 (2001:468:c12:1::1) 95.006 ms 108.128 ms 96.164 ms On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:18:31PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. > > BUT the routing to Europe is really stupid and absolutely unacceptable: > Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:/Users/Jordi/Desktop jordi$ traceroute6 > www.euro6ix.org > traceroute6 to www.euro6ix.org (2001:800:40:2a03::3) from > 2001:468:c12:136:20d:93ff:feeb:73, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets > 1 2001:468:c12:136::4 2.491 ms 1.672 ms 1.641 ms > 2 2001:468:c12:1::1 2.353 ms 2.463 ms 2.387 ms > 3 2001:468:ff:185c::1 17.22 ms * 3.112 ms > 4 atlang-washng.abilene.abilene.ucaid.edu 21.407 ms 18.55 ms 18.519 ms > 5 hstnng-atlang.abilene.ucaid.edu 44.552 ms 43.544 ms 38.279 ms > 6 losang-hstnng.abilene.ucaid.edu 69.868 ms 69.807 ms * > 7 3ffe:8140:101:1::2 178.257 ms 173.559 ms 174.291 ms > 8 hitachi1.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 175.771 ms 174.657 ms 173.76 ms > 9 pc6.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 195.116 ms 183.588 ms 190.05 ms > 10 * 3ffe:1800::3:2d0:b7ff:fe9a:6233 185.624 ms 183.481 ms > 11 3ffe:1800::3:230:48ff:fe41:4e95 184.689 ms 183.501 ms 184.908 ms > 12 2001:468:ff:16c1::5 183.309 ms 184.138 ms 194.804 ms > 13 v6-tunnel62-uk6x.ipv6.btexact.com 457.111 ms 456.848 ms 455.127 ms > 14 2001:800:40:2e02::1 513.549 ms 511.013 ms 515.763 ms > 15 2001:800:40:2f02::2 514.232 ms 512.886 ms 520.444 ms > 16 ns1.euro6ix.com 520.54 ms 516.964 ms 510.757 ms > > Can we please fix this, PLEASE ? No idea why hasn't been fixed already since > when reported on Monday, in parallel with the rest. > > By the way, the press should take note about Airespace marketing versus > reality. I hope this company can be honest an make a public correction on > that, otherwise customers should not trust them anymore. > > Regards, > Jordi > > > > De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Fecha: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:43:07 - > > Para: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Asunto: RE: IPv6 in the network, please > > > > So somebody needs to get Airespace's marketroids to slow down a little > > bit: > > > > http://www.airespace.com/news/press_releases/04_1026b.php > > > > --Mat > > > > P.S. Sincere thanks to the IETF61 NOC for making these efforts to get > > IPv6 functional on the entire network - I'll try that new config now > > from Lincoln. > > > > On , [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> Begin forwarded message: > >> > >>> From: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Date: November 10, 2004 12:07:08 PM EST > >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Subject: IPv6 > >>> Reply-To: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> > >>> Folks, > >>> > >>> To expand on Jeff's explanation of the IPv6 status here at > > IETF61; > >>> The entire network, both wired and wireless, was designed from the > >>> get-go as being IPv6 capable. It also had a very real and major > >>> requirement to be stable in the face of hundreds of clients all at > >>> 100% transmit power, rogue APs, and all th
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:18:31PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. Now v6 works for me as well. I think perhaps my initial RS was ignored for some reason, but I received a later RA. Not sure. Anyway, I now have working v6 as well, and for me the routing is perfect: traceroute to sverresborg.uninett.no (2001:700:e000:0:204:75ff:fee4:423b) from 2001:468:c12:136:205:4eff:fe40:1762, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets 1 2001:468:c12:136::4 (2001:468:c12:136::4) 2.252 ms 2.897 ms 5.934 ms 2 2001:468:c12:1::1 (2001:468:c12:1::1) 9.827 ms 2.893 ms 8.934 ms 3 2001:468:ff:185c::1 (2001:468:ff:185c::1) 10.812 ms 3.932 ms 3.91 ms 4 abilene.de2.de.geant.net (2001:798:2014:20aa::1) 96.823 ms 98.937 ms 109.962 ms 5 de.se1.se.geant.net (2001:798:20cc:1402:2501::2) 116.966 ms 122.937 ms 117.96 ms 6 nordunet-gw.se1.se.geant.net (2001:798:2025:10aa::2) 116.723 ms 114.947 ms 119.942 ms 7 sw-gw.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f026::1) 115.955 ms 115.943 ms 115.961 ms 8 6net-gw.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f02a::2) 115.972 ms 115.938 ms 115.953 ms 9 6net-gw.uninett.no (2001:948:0:f03a::2) 122.955 ms 123.945 ms 168.977 ms 10 oslo-gw1.uninett.no (2001:700:0:10d::1) 134.935 ms 123.957 ms 122.944 ms 11 trd-gw.uninett.no (2001:700:0:10::2) 132.927 ms 130.938 ms 134.954 ms 12 teknobyen-gw.uninett.no (2001:700:0:50b::2) 130.958 ms 130.942 ms 135.958 ms 13 uninett-gw.uninett.no (2001:700:0:510::2) 133.97 ms 132.934 ms 135.956 ms 14 sverresborg.uninett.no (2001:700:e000:0:204:75ff:fee4:423b) 130.958 ms 144.943 ms 133.958 ms That is, from here to a host in Norway. I don't understand why I can't get IPv4 address with DHCP on v4 network but on v6 network. But using v6 network I have working v6 AND v4 and am quite happy. Thanks for all the work you've put in, Stig ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
On Nov 10 2004, at 14:18 Uhr, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
By the way, the press should take note about Airespace marketing versus
reality. I hope this company can be honest an make a public correction
on
that, otherwise customers should not trust them anymore.
Oh, come on, give them some slack.
Companies announce products that in reality are in beta ("1.0") all the
time.
I think it's great they are working on IPv6 support, and that they are
getting good beta feedback from this site.
Gruesse, Carsten
___
Ietf mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 02:18:31PM -0500, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. Not for me. But interestingly, I've never been able to get an IPv4 address (or any responses) to DHCP queries from dhcpcd-1.3.22_p4 on Linux on the v4 network. However, I managed to get a response and an IPv4 address on the IETF61IPv6 network. Stig ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
Agree, good job. Is working for me since over 10 minutes ago. BUT the routing to Europe is really stupid and absolutely unacceptable: Ordenador-de-Jordi-Palet:/Users/Jordi/Desktop jordi$ traceroute6 www.euro6ix.org traceroute6 to www.euro6ix.org (2001:800:40:2a03::3) from 2001:468:c12:136:20d:93ff:feeb:73, 30 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 2001:468:c12:136::4 2.491 ms 1.672 ms 1.641 ms 2 2001:468:c12:1::1 2.353 ms 2.463 ms 2.387 ms 3 2001:468:ff:185c::1 17.22 ms * 3.112 ms 4 atlang-washng.abilene.abilene.ucaid.edu 21.407 ms 18.55 ms 18.519 ms 5 hstnng-atlang.abilene.ucaid.edu 44.552 ms 43.544 ms 38.279 ms 6 losang-hstnng.abilene.ucaid.edu 69.868 ms 69.807 ms * 7 3ffe:8140:101:1::2 178.257 ms 173.559 ms 174.291 ms 8 hitachi1.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 175.771 ms 174.657 ms 173.76 ms 9 pc6.otemachi.wide.ad.jp 195.116 ms 183.588 ms 190.05 ms 10 * 3ffe:1800::3:2d0:b7ff:fe9a:6233 185.624 ms 183.481 ms 11 3ffe:1800::3:230:48ff:fe41:4e95 184.689 ms 183.501 ms 184.908 ms 12 2001:468:ff:16c1::5 183.309 ms 184.138 ms 194.804 ms 13 v6-tunnel62-uk6x.ipv6.btexact.com 457.111 ms 456.848 ms 455.127 ms 14 2001:800:40:2e02::1 513.549 ms 511.013 ms 515.763 ms 15 2001:800:40:2f02::2 514.232 ms 512.886 ms 520.444 ms 16 ns1.euro6ix.com 520.54 ms 516.964 ms 510.757 ms Can we please fix this, PLEASE ? No idea why hasn't been fixed already since when reported on Monday, in parallel with the rest. By the way, the press should take note about Airespace marketing versus reality. I hope this company can be honest an make a public correction on that, otherwise customers should not trust them anymore. Regards, Jordi > De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Fecha: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:43:07 - > Para: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Asunto: RE: IPv6 in the network, please > > So somebody needs to get Airespace's marketroids to slow down a little > bit: > > http://www.airespace.com/news/press_releases/04_1026b.php > > --Mat > > P.S. Sincere thanks to the IETF61 NOC for making these efforts to get > IPv6 functional on the entire network - I'll try that new config now > from Lincoln. > > On , [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Date: November 10, 2004 12:07:08 PM EST >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: IPv6 >>> Reply-To: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> Folks, >>> >>> To expand on Jeff's explanation of the IPv6 status here at > IETF61; >>> The entire network, both wired and wireless, was designed from the >>> get-go as being IPv6 capable. It also had a very real and major >>> requirement to be stable in the face of hundreds of clients all at >>> 100% transmit power, rogue APs, and all the other problems that have >>> plagued previous IETF wireless networks. The good folks at Airespace >>> seemed to have a system that met this goal, and as we all can see, >>> it indeed works well. >>> >>> However, when we asked Airespace to join us in this adventure, > it >>> became clear that the "intelligence" of their system worked through >>> tracking IPv4 DHCP requests, and thus wouldn't work with IPv6. This >>> lack of IPv6 support was nearly a show stopper, however Airespace >>> jumped through some major hoops to design, implement, and deploy code >>> that monitors RAs and RSs specifically to handle IPv6 for this >>> network. >>> >>> Like most brand new code, when we deployed it, we encountered >>> problems. Problems that lead to instability in ALL wireless network >>> access. After several long days and nights of working on this long >>> before the first attendees arrived (we've been on site since Tuesday >>> 2nd - Election Day ;) we decided to disable the IPv6 support on the >>> wireless network, rather than risk the overall network stability. >>> Airespace continues to work on the problems, and we believe that we >>> have a reasonable interim solution. >>> >>> We have phased in a new image with limited deployment, which we > will >>> monitor. If we experience no problems, IPv6 will be back on the >>> wireless lan, however we need to maintain the overall stability of >>> the wireless network as our highest priority. >>> >>> For those who need IPv6 on wireless: >>> >>> SSID: ietf61v6 >>> WEP Key: thisisav6wlan >>> Hex: 746869736973617636776c616e >>> >>> Coverage will be available in Georgetown, Lincoln, Jefferson, >>> Monroe, Military and Hemisphere. You should not associate with this >>> wireless network if you need stable IPv4. This is a dedicated >>> network with new AP's and a new controller. >>> >>> My thanks to our volunteer staff who worked to deploy this > network >>> in the late hours last night (and very early hours this morning) >>> after the social event. >>> >>> For those that are inconvenienced by the loss of IPv6, I > sincerely >>> apologize, and remind you that
Re: IPv6 in the network, please
Ironic given the recent press announcements by Airespace, which seemed to have jumped the gun a little ;) First fully IPv6-compatible WLAN kit available - October 27, 2004, 11:40 BST - Airespace has become the first WLAN OEM to announce support for the IPv6 protocol in its products - http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/networks/0,39020345,39171566,00.htm Thanks for all the work on this though - much appreciated! There are other real problems with companies/products like BlueSocket that do not support authentication/admission for WLAN users based on IPv6 traffic, and that have no plans to introduce such support. Tim On Wed, Nov 10, 2004 at 01:09:44PM -0500, Jeff Young wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Begin forwarded message: > > >From: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Date: November 10, 2004 12:07:08 PM EST > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: IPv6 > >Reply-To: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Folks, > > > > To expand on Jeff's explanation of the IPv6 status here at IETF61; > >The entire network, both wired and wireless, was designed from the > >get-go as being IPv6 capable. It also had a very real and major > >requirement to be stable in the face of hundreds of clients all at > >100% transmit power, rogue APs, and all the other problems that have > >plagued previous IETF wireless networks. The good folks at Airespace > >seemed to have a system that met this goal, and as we all can see, it > >indeed works well. > > > > However, when we asked Airespace to join us in this adventure, it > >became clear that the "intelligence" of their system worked through > >tracking IPv4 DHCP requests, and thus wouldn't work with IPv6. This > >lack of IPv6 support was nearly a show stopper, however Airespace > >jumped through some major hoops to design, implement, and deploy code > >that monitors RAs and RSs specifically to handle IPv6 for this > >network. > > > > Like most brand new code, when we deployed it, we encountered > >problems. Problems that lead to instability in ALL wireless network > >access. After several long days and nights of working on this long > >before the first attendees arrived (we've been on site since Tuesday > >2nd - Election Day ;) we decided to disable the IPv6 support on the > >wireless network, rather than risk the overall network stability. > >Airespace continues to work on the problems, and we believe that we > >have a reasonable interim solution. > > > > We have phased in a new image with limited deployment, which we will > >monitor. If we experience no problems, IPv6 will be back on the > >wireless lan, however we need to maintain the overall stability of the > >wireless network as our highest priority. > > > > For those who need IPv6 on wireless: > > > > SSID: ietf61v6 > > WEP Key: thisisav6wlan > > Hex: 746869736973617636776c616e > > > > Coverage will be available in Georgetown, Lincoln, Jefferson, Monroe, > >Military and Hemisphere. You should not associate with this wireless > >network if you need stable IPv4. This is a dedicated network with new > >AP's and a new controller. > > > > My thanks to our volunteer staff who worked to deploy this network in > >the late hours last night (and very early hours this morning) after > >the social event. > > > > For those that are inconvenienced by the loss of IPv6, I sincerely > >apologize, and remind you that native IPv6 is available at every wired > >port in the terminal room. > > > > Thanks for bearing with us, and have a good meeting! > > > > - Ben Crosby > > Alcatel / IETF61 NOC > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) > > iD8DBQFBklluLWqnmaznXfoRAi/qAJ4nUW48fV51MGYwRdX1IOqh2OAYHQCgvyZT > nuUrX42hGaM8Xg7/fKPj1jc= > =t7zw > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > ___ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Tim North American IPv6 Task Force Technologist Seminar More info at http://www.ipv6seminar.com/ ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: IPv6 in the network, please
So somebody needs to get Airespace's marketroids to slow down a little bit: http://www.airespace.com/news/press_releases/04_1026b.php --Mat P.S. Sincere thanks to the IETF61 NOC for making these efforts to get IPv6 functional on the entire network - I'll try that new config now from Lincoln. On , [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: November 10, 2004 12:07:08 PM EST >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: IPv6 >> Reply-To: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> Folks, >> >> To expand on Jeff's explanation of the IPv6 status here at IETF61; >> The entire network, both wired and wireless, was designed from the >> get-go as being IPv6 capable. It also had a very real and major >> requirement to be stable in the face of hundreds of clients all at >> 100% transmit power, rogue APs, and all the other problems that have >> plagued previous IETF wireless networks. The good folks at Airespace >> seemed to have a system that met this goal, and as we all can see, >> it indeed works well. >> >> However, when we asked Airespace to join us in this adventure, it >> became clear that the "intelligence" of their system worked through >> tracking IPv4 DHCP requests, and thus wouldn't work with IPv6. This >> lack of IPv6 support was nearly a show stopper, however Airespace >> jumped through some major hoops to design, implement, and deploy code >> that monitors RAs and RSs specifically to handle IPv6 for this >> network. >> >> Like most brand new code, when we deployed it, we encountered >> problems. Problems that lead to instability in ALL wireless network >> access. After several long days and nights of working on this long >> before the first attendees arrived (we've been on site since Tuesday >> 2nd - Election Day ;) we decided to disable the IPv6 support on the >> wireless network, rather than risk the overall network stability. >> Airespace continues to work on the problems, and we believe that we >> have a reasonable interim solution. >> >> We have phased in a new image with limited deployment, which we will >> monitor. If we experience no problems, IPv6 will be back on the >> wireless lan, however we need to maintain the overall stability of >> the wireless network as our highest priority. >> >> For those who need IPv6 on wireless: >> >> SSID: ietf61v6 >> WEP Key: thisisav6wlan >> Hex: 746869736973617636776c616e >> >> Coverage will be available in Georgetown, Lincoln, Jefferson, >> Monroe, Military and Hemisphere. You should not associate with this >> wireless network if you need stable IPv4. This is a dedicated >> network with new AP's and a new controller. >> >> My thanks to our volunteer staff who worked to deploy this network >> in the late hours last night (and very early hours this morning) >> after the social event. >> >> For those that are inconvenienced by the loss of IPv6, I sincerely >> apologize, and remind you that native IPv6 is available at every >> wired port in the terminal room. >> >> Thanks for bearing with us, and have a good meeting! >> >> - Ben Crosby >> Alcatel / IETF61 NOC >> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) > > iD8DBQFBklluLWqnmaznXfoRAi/qAJ4nUW48fV51MGYwRdX1IOqh2OAYHQCgvyZT > nuUrX42hGaM8Xg7/fKPj1jc= =t7zw > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > ___ > Ietf mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
IPv6 in the network, please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Begin forwarded message: From: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: November 10, 2004 12:07:08 PM EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: IPv6 Reply-To: Ben Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Folks, To expand on Jeff's explanation of the IPv6 status here at IETF61; The entire network, both wired and wireless, was designed from the get-go as being IPv6 capable. It also had a very real and major requirement to be stable in the face of hundreds of clients all at 100% transmit power, rogue APs, and all the other problems that have plagued previous IETF wireless networks. The good folks at Airespace seemed to have a system that met this goal, and as we all can see, it indeed works well. However, when we asked Airespace to join us in this adventure, it became clear that the "intelligence" of their system worked through tracking IPv4 DHCP requests, and thus wouldn't work with IPv6. This lack of IPv6 support was nearly a show stopper, however Airespace jumped through some major hoops to design, implement, and deploy code that monitors RAs and RSs specifically to handle IPv6 for this network. Like most brand new code, when we deployed it, we encountered problems. Problems that lead to instability in ALL wireless network access. After several long days and nights of working on this long before the first attendees arrived (we've been on site since Tuesday 2nd - Election Day ;) we decided to disable the IPv6 support on the wireless network, rather than risk the overall network stability. Airespace continues to work on the problems, and we believe that we have a reasonable interim solution. We have phased in a new image with limited deployment, which we will monitor. If we experience no problems, IPv6 will be back on the wireless lan, however we need to maintain the overall stability of the wireless network as our highest priority. For those who need IPv6 on wireless: SSID: ietf61v6 WEP Key: thisisav6wlan Hex: 746869736973617636776c616e Coverage will be available in Georgetown, Lincoln, Jefferson, Monroe, Military and Hemisphere. You should not associate with this wireless network if you need stable IPv4. This is a dedicated network with new AP's and a new controller. My thanks to our volunteer staff who worked to deploy this network in the late hours last night (and very early hours this morning) after the social event. For those that are inconvenienced by the loss of IPv6, I sincerely apologize, and remind you that native IPv6 is available at every wired port in the terminal room. Thanks for bearing with us, and have a good meeting! - Ben Crosby Alcatel / IETF61 NOC -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (Darwin) iD8DBQFBklluLWqnmaznXfoRAi/qAJ4nUW48fV51MGYwRdX1IOqh2OAYHQCgvyZT nuUrX42hGaM8Xg7/fKPj1jc= =t7zw -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
understanding VOSIP
We have a possible requirement to implement a VOSIP environment. I understand SVOIP and of course VOIP as well as SIP...but when people talk about VOSIP - does this relate to the SIPRNET or an implementation of SIP... any and all info would be helpful. Thanks, Marlene Marlene Lopez CS Engineer US ARMY/NETCOM/ESTA ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
IETF61 - U.S. Capitol tour for Thursday cancelled
I regret to say the tour of the U.S. Capitol scheduled for Thursday morning, Nov. 11 is CANCELLED. I have been able to add a second tour for Friday morning. Those scheduled for the Thursday tour will have first priority for the Friday morning tour. Sorry for such short notice. The congressional office that was to assist me with the Thursday tour (even though Thursday is a U.S. federal holiday) informed me this afternoon that they have decided to close totally that day. This is a slow time in the Capitol, congress in recess. I must have a congressional staff member with me in order to take a VIP tour group into the Capitol building. Two alternatives if you wish to tour the Capitol: 1. Join the expanded Friday morning IETF61 tour. We will meet at 8:30 a.m. at the IETF61 registration desk in the hotel, taxi to a congressman's office and enter the Capitol without waiting. Email me so I can reserve a place for you. One Friday morning tour will be going to Senator Patrick Leahy's office, the second tour to Rep. Robert Goodlatte's office. Co-chairs of the Congressional Internet Caucus. 2. Go to the U.S. Capitol and take the public tour. This can be done any day (including this Thursday) except Sunday. Will involve standing in line, probably for several hours. The Capitol opens for public tours at 9:00 a.m., and tour tickets are given out for the day on a first-come first-served basis. This week, if you are in line early, say by 8:15 a.m., you should be able to get tickets for a tour that enters the Capitol between 9:00 and 10:00. If you join the line as late as 1:00 p.m. you should be able to get tickets for that day, but no certainty, and the tickets may be for any time that afternoon. There is no charge for tickets, and every person desiring a ticket must wait in line; one person cannot obtain tickets for a family or group. Sorry for the last-minute change. Gene Gaines [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sterling, Virginia +1 703-433-2081 ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
