Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Brian E Carpenter 
On 2011-02-17 03:47, Livingood, Jason wrote:
>> Parts of the challenge here is that turning on IPv6 (publishing a )
>> can also cause brokenness for users that have no IPv6 connectivity, e.g.,
>> those relying on broken 6to4 relays.  This has been documented all over
>> the place, for example here:
>> 
>>
>> So even if there are very few IPv6 eyeballs, this event can serve to
>> flush out that flavor of brokenness.  As I understand it, part of the
>> idea of everyone moving together is to get people to see the brokenness
>> across multiple sites, thus to blame the network not the content
>> provider, thus to pressure the networks to fix things.
> 
> Richard is exactly right on where a lot of value is. This is an
> opportunity to find and fix the ~0.05% level of brokenness. Even
> "non-participating" ISPs will need to take steps to prepare, and this is
> of course a great forcing function within companies to ask what their IPv6
> plans and to begin/continue IPv6 technical training, etc.

Over in v6ops, we have had some vigorous discussion about the anycast 6to4
brokenness and there is a draft:
   draft-carpenter-v6ops-6to4-teredo-advisory
My hope is that this will be in good enough shape prior to June 8th
that it can contribute to the day. Discussion welcome on the v6ops list.

Brian

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Livingood, Jason 
>Parts of the challenge here is that turning on IPv6 (publishing a )
>can also cause brokenness for users that have no IPv6 connectivity, e.g.,
>those relying on broken 6to4 relays.  This has been documented all over
>the place, for example here:
>
>
>So even if there are very few IPv6 eyeballs, this event can serve to
>flush out that flavor of brokenness.  As I understand it, part of the
>idea of everyone moving together is to get people to see the brokenness
>across multiple sites, thus to blame the network not the content
>provider, thus to pressure the networks to fix things.

Richard is exactly right on where a lot of value is. This is an
opportunity to find and fix the ~0.05% level of brokenness. Even
"non-participating" ISPs will need to take steps to prepare, and this is
of course a great forcing function within companies to ask what their IPv6
plans and to begin/continue IPv6 technical training, etc.

Jason

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

RE: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Worley, Dale R (Dale) 
> On 2011-2-15, at 19:45, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
>> Noting the increasing length of the list 
>> athttp://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/
>
> ...I mostly note that I see very few eyeball ISPs on that list (with the 
> notable exception of two large US cable ISPs - great, guys!)
>
> Turning on IPv6 on the content provider side is great and all, but without 
> the eyeballs on IPv6, I wonder a bit about the point of this exercise.

The point is that eventually, someone will notice that the IETF is lobbying 
hard for IPv6 as the necessary next step for the Internet, but that the IETF 
doesn't actually use IPv6 in its own infrastructure, and we are greatly 
embarrassed.

It would be like lobbying regarding global warming while owning 500 coal-fired 
power plants.  It doesn't make what you *say* wrong, but it looks very, very 
bad.  It suggests that despite our advocacy of IPv6 there is some great 
difficulty to going to IPv6 that we are not admitting.

Dale
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Marshall Eubanks 

On Feb 16, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:

> On 2011-2-15, at 19:45, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
>> Noting the increasing length of the list 
>> athttp://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/
> 
> ...I mostly note that I see very few eyeball ISPs on that list (with the 
> notable exception of two large US cable ISPs - great, guys!)
> 
> Turning on IPv6 on the content provider side is great and all, but without 
> the eyeballs on IPv6, I wonder a bit about the point of this exercise.
> 

You have to start somewhere...

And, this has been good at getting some publicity for IPv6, which is not 
negligible. 

Marshall

> Lars___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Richard L. Barnes 
Parts of the challenge here is that turning on IPv6 (publishing a ) can 
also cause brokenness for users that have no IPv6 connectivity, e.g., those 
relying on broken 6to4 relays.  This has been documented all over the place, 
for example here:


So even if there are very few IPv6 eyeballs, this event can serve to flush out 
that flavor of brokenness.  As I understand it, part of the idea of everyone 
moving together is to get people to see the brokenness across multiple sites, 
thus to blame the network not the content provider, thus to pressure the 
networks to fix things.

--Richard



On Feb 16, 2011, at 4:13 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:

> On 2011-2-15, at 19:45, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
>> Noting the increasing length of the list 
>> athttp://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/
> 
> ...I mostly note that I see very few eyeball ISPs on that list (with the 
> notable exception of two large US cable ISPs - great, guys!)
> 
> Turning on IPv6 on the content provider side is great and all, but without 
> the eyeballs on IPv6, I wonder a bit about the point of this exercise.
> 
> Lars___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-16 Thread Lars Eggert 
On 2011-2-15, at 19:45, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> Noting the increasing length of the list 
> athttp://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/

...I mostly note that I see very few eyeball ISPs on that list (with the 
notable exception of two large US cable ISPs - great, guys!)

Turning on IPv6 on the content provider side is great and all, but without the 
eyeballs on IPv6, I wonder a bit about the point of this exercise.

Lars

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-15 Thread Russ Housley 
I have asked that www.ietf.org be added to the sites that are already IPv6 
enabled.  I've also nudged the folks associated with these other organizations 
to do the same.

Russ

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:45:01PM +, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> Noting the increasing length of the list at 
> http://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/ (now with many former staunch 
> nay-sayers on it, pleasingly), and that the ISOC considers itself a member, I 
> think it only right to point out that we (IETF, IRTF, IESG, IAB, ICANN, IANA, 
> et al) are not listed.
> 
> I don't suppose now is the time for an April 1 RFC discussing our commitment 
> to the IPv6 protocol, and our intent to be present on World IPv6 day 
> . is it?
> 
> Yes, I think we probably deserve a small slice of that publicity pie, too. :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> Sabahattin
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-15 Thread Sabahattin Gucukoglu 
On 15 Feb 2011, at 18:56, Shumon Huque wrote:
> Maybe it's because IETF/IRTF already have their outward facing
> services available over IPv6 (Web, Mail, &, DNS at least - I checked 
> only for ietf.org and irtf.org).

Perhaps, but the same is true for ISOC.org.  Anyway, I'm not questioning ISOC's 
policy on the event, just making an observation.

Cheers,
Sabahattin
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Re: World IPv6 Day and Us

2011-02-15 Thread Shumon Huque 
Maybe it's because IETF/IRTF already have their outward facing
services available over IPv6 (Web, Mail, &, DNS at least - I checked 
only for ietf.org and irtf.org).

The stated purpose of IPv6 day seems to be to get folks who don't 
have any IPv6 in production yet to make it available for a 24-hour 
period for a "test drive":

On 8 June, 2011, Google, Facebook, Yahoo!, Akamai and
Limelight Networks will be amongst some of the major organisations
that will offer their content over IPv6 for a 24-hour "test
flight". The goal of the Test Flight Day is to motivate organizations
across the industry ? Internet service providers, hardware makers,
operating system vendors and web companies ? to prepare their services
for IPv6 to ensure a successful transition as IPv4 addresses run out.

But sure, it sounds fine to me if we are also publicising 
organizations who already have production IPv6 services running long
in advance of "World IPv6 Day".

--Shumon.

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 05:45:01PM +, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote:
> Noting the increasing length of the list at 
> http://isoc.org/wp/worldipv6day/participants/ (now with many former staunch 
> nay-sayers on it, pleasingly), and that the ISOC considers itself a member, I 
> think it only right to point out that we (IETF, IRTF, IESG, IAB, ICANN, IANA, 
> et al) are not listed.
> 
> I don't suppose now is the time for an April 1 RFC discussing our commitment 
> to the IPv6 protocol, and our intent to be present on World IPv6 day 
> . is it?
> 
> Yes, I think we probably deserve a small slice of that publicity pie, too. :-)
> 
> Cheers,
> Sabahattin
> ___
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

-- 
Shumon Huque
University of Pennsylvania.
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf