Re: IPv6 standard?
2009/9/17 Steve Crocker : > Here are some useful points along the way from pure IPv4 to pure IPv6. > A. Every new computer is able to talk IPv6 > B. Every transport is able to talk IPv6, i.e. every network from tier 1 ISPs > down through wifi hot spots and every internal corporate network > C. Every major service, e.g. Google, CNN, Amazon, is reachable via IPv6 I would suggest C before B. My machine has been able to "talk IPv6" for a long time. The more recent changes have been related to the fact that it can now "talk IPv6" in different environments. Give it IPv6 and it will use that. Give it only a public IPv4 address and it will attempt 6to4. Give it a private/NATted IPv4 address and it will do Teredo. For IPv6 to be interesting I have to be able use it where I am. And Google at least is already there... And transport will follow. Some time back an ISP person asked me if they should offer IPv6 - nobody was asking for it. I suggested that he start by looking at how much tunneled IPv6 he was already carrying. > F. A substantial number of major services are not directly accessible via > IPv4 (but, of course, will be accessible via gateways) Of course it would be nice for legacy services to remain accessible in the same old way for a long, long time. But the reality is that a lot of this business just does not work that way. I just do not expect other people to invest in gateways for me. But again that is not for tomorrow and maybe people will change. > Imagine the decision process for the CIO or network architect of a medium or > large company. A security policy exists and it's implemented with a > collection of commercial products -- firewalls, routers, intrusion detection > systems, etc. -- all configured and managed to support the company's > security policy. Further imagine the both the transport and the individual > devices are all capable of supporting and using IPv6. How quickly will the > CIO or network architect decide that it's time to switch everyone over to > IPv6? But he will not decide to "switch everyone over". No enterprise-level flag-day. The more interesting question for him is which bit of the organisation he decides to enable first. And anyway some of them will be still using IPv6 before then. > IPv6 is definitely necessary and we should all do everything we can to move > I'm just noting that even when IPv6 is widely available > and in broad use, there will be a long tail before IPv4 fades from the > scene. I am not so sure about the relevance of the "long tail". Anybody on this list using a laptop which is ten years old? Five years old? How often to you renew bits of your home network? I of course don't know where the tipping point is but I suspect that it could tip in fewer years than one might have imagined. Still years. But less than ten rather than more than twenty? Gordon ___ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Yahoo is not using ESMTP
When I had a 14.4K modem *all* I did was e-mail. Even with 56K surfing was not fun and the web was only consulted in case of real need. But now... So maybe it simply depends where you are on the curve. I was in a spam workshop yesterday and a guy was saying that spam was a bandwidth issue. I suppose it is if you are on the end of a slow link and (therefore?) all you are doing is e-mail: a big chunk of everything you do is always a lot. But it appears not so if you are on a fast connection where e-mail traffic is low in the single digits. So from the WSIS/WGIG perspective I am being asked: is spam a significant (network) problem for certain parts of the world? Maybe more importantly: will it still be so in UN timescales? Gordon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Franck Martin Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 12:35 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Yahoo is not using ESMTP This is interesting, because on our side of the world, when I do an analysis, I can see that mail is about 30% of the TCP traffic, with the web being about 40% of TCP traffic. I guess we do not have the same needs over very slow links... ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Chinese IPv9
See also: http://www.chinatechnews.com/index.php?action=show&type=news&id=1405 Google gives about 4000 hits for IPv9. Including of course RFC 1606 :-) Gordon -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 3:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Chinese IPv9 Hi, a german computer magazine reported that China is developing their own IP address scheme as IPv9 ( http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/48859 ) in order to improve "security" (probably spelled: censorship). They cite http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-07/05/content_1572719.htm It is to be used inside China, and they will have routers as gateways to ipv4 and ipv6 and the borders of China (obviously not letting everything pass through). Does anyone know details about this protocol? What's the IETF's opinion (if IETF does have anything like an IETF's opinion) about such an effort? regards Hadmut ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Seoul - not about visas!
I have just received the following advice from our services here: "The Medical Service informs that following the spread of avian influenza (bird flu) in South East Asia, as a precautionary measure it is advisable, for all those who are going on mission to this area, to be vaccinated against influenza. Although, this vaccination does not protect you from bird flu (H5N1) it offers a degree of immunity. It goes without saying that one should pay scrupulous attention to personal hygiene and the consumption of food and that all contact with poultry (in markets, farms, slaughter houses ...) is to be avoided at all costs. ..." A country-by-country overview of the situation can be found on the BBC's web-site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3429851.stm I am very much looking forward to my first visit to Seoul! It is my next visit to the US that has me more concerned. That security guy with the bright blue latex gloves at JFK last time... And I am always, but always, pulled out for the special treatment! Ouch! /Gordon
RE: IETF58 - Network Facts
<> http://www.computerworld.com/mobiletopics/mobile/story/0,10801,87322,00.html ?f=x68 So at least we know one place not to take the WiFi-enabled horde that is the IETF road-show! Then again... /gordon
FW: [ga] ITU-T Workshops on E-Health, E-Government, and Next Generation Ne tworks
Particularly the third item...
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 27 March 2003 16:35
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ga] ITU-T Workshops on E-Health, E-Government, and Next
Generation Ne tworks
The ITU-T is organizing three open workshops on, respectively, E-Health,
E-Government, and Next Generation Networks. A brief description is provided
below, together with the URLs pointing to full information.
Standardization in E-Health, 23-25 May 2003, Geneva, Switzerland.
Standardization in e-health has long been sought, but has so far not
produced a very high level interoperability desired by many. In organizing
this workshop, ITU-T, with the support of ITU-D and the participation of
ISO, IEC and other SDOs, aims at identifying the key issues needed in
support of attaining this goal and to identify a possible role to be played
in ITU-T to promote such standards. Full information at:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/e-health/index.html
Challenges, perspectives and standardization issues in E-Government, 5-6
June 2003, Geneva, Switzerland. This workshop looks to develop perspectives
for the members and invited guests on the issues facing Member States and
vendors in the implementation of e-Government solutions today and in the
future, with a focus on standardization issues. Full information at:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/e-government/index.html
Next Generation Networks: What, When and How, 9-10 July 2003, Geneva,
Switzerland. The concept of Next Generation Networks (NGN) is quickly
emerging as an essential initiative towards defining "what do we do next?"
The current situation in telecommunications is characterised by over-arching
market factors encompassing open competition between operators due to the
rapid deregulation, the explosion of digital traffic (especially the
increasing use of the Internet), in combination with sustained market demand
for new generation multimedia services and applications. A key element of
the marketplace is the increasing demand for global mobility and nomadism as
these become norms from the end user point of view. Full information at:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/worksem/ngn/index.html
Best,
Richard
-
Richard Hill
Counsellor, ITU-T SG2
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva 20
Switzerland
tel: +41 22 730 5887
FAX: +41 22 730 5853
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Study Group 2 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
This message was passed to you via the [EMAIL PROTECTED] list.
Send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
Wireless in future meetings
It sort of had to start happening. Marriott apparently aims to provide wireless access at 400 hotels in Germany, the U.K. and the U.S. <> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/12/19/021219hnmarriott.xml?s=IDG NS In the same article its says that T-Mobile will charge prices starting at $8.16 for one hour. (ouch!) And for exactly what kind of connectivity? So what then for future meetings? Will they let us play alongside for "free" if we promise to be v6 only? On the other hand imagine wireless-free WG sessions! Just thinking forward... Gordon
Computer-related Crime
Computer-related Crime The European Commission is participating in a number of initiatives aiming at making communications networks like the Internet safer from criminal activity. It adopted on 26.1.2001 a Communication to the Council and the European Parliament COM(2000)890) entitled Creating a Safer Information Society by Improving the Security of Information Infrastructures and Combating Computer-related Crime http://europa.eu.int/ISPO/eif/InternetPoliciesSite/Crime/crime1.html The European Commission would like to invite comments from all interested parties on the issues addressed in this Communication. Comments may be sent up to 23 March 2001 via e-mail to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Comments will in principle be published, unless the sender explicitly requests the comment not to be published. Anonymous comments will not be published. The Commission reserves the right not to publish comments it receives. The European Commission will also organise a public hearing of interested parties on the issues addressed in the Communication. This hearing will take place on 7 March 2001. Requests for an invitation to submit a statement at this hearing may be sent up to 20 February 2001 via e-mail to the following address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The European Commission reserves the right to make a selection of parties to be heard. Any selection will be based on the number of requests and the wish to have a wide coverage of interests. -
Re: Should IETF do more to fight computer crime?
One current international position on "Crime in Cyberspace" can be found in the draft Council of Europe Convention. This was released for public comment towards the end of April. See: conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/projets/cybercrime.htm Information on the Council of Europe can be found at: www.coe.fr/eng/present/about.htm Scott Bradner gave a presentation at the G8 hi-tech crime event in Paris last week. (This was the invitation Fred Baker mentioned during the plenary in Adelaide.) It would be very interesting to get Scott's views, an IETF view, on how it went in Paris and on what the G8 is doing... Gordon European Commission Information Society DG Office Bu33 5-80 rue de la Loi 200 B-1049 Bruxelles Tel: +32-2-29.6-3546 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
