Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Colin and list, Colin Petrie writes: > [Problems with VPNs over DS-Lite] > > (Of course I sent the ISP tcpdumps and a full analysis pointing out to > them that the firmware in the CPE they provided me was broken. They > decided to fix it by sending me a different model of CPE. I doubt they > ever escalated it to actually fix the underlying problem in the original > CPE. But if you happen to have a Technicolor TC7200, be wary of its > DS-Lite implementation!) that's what I've mentioned(?) before: These issues occur at a reasonably large scale, so they need to be handled by first, or at most second, level support. But show me any first level supporter able to diagnose that, or even understand what a tcpdump is or what it means. They simply don't have a chance. Aimlessly beating at the problem until the customer shuts up (no matter if his problem is solved or he just gave up) is pretty much all they can do. But that doesn't mean that you want to rely on that sort of setup. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Andrew and list, Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko writes: > An idea: Next time you meet the folks encountering the problems, > suggest them to google for "go6 nat64" and configure their resolver to > one of Jan's NAT64 test DNS64s, and then turn off IPv4 on their host > completely. to my knowledge that won't help in any way with their STUN/SIP problems. It will also add to latency. And if Jan's setup gets overloaded, then the overall result won't help them any. But I'll point them that way next time I get into such a situation. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
On 09/05/16 22:09, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: >>> Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with >>> DS-Lite >> >> Any more details on that? >> > And apparently various VPN solutions, too, but I never got access to > any details with this. I came across this recently (my ISP now provides native IPv6 + DS-lite IPv4), and after debugging it, found that the CPE device was reporting an incorrect path MTU when receiving a DF packet that was larger than the tunnel interface to the AFTR. This caused UDP IPv4 OpenVPN tunnels to stall and die horribly. I worked around it by overriding the link-mtu config in OpenVPN. But in this case, it was the CPE, not the AFTR, causing the problem. (Of course I sent the ISP tcpdumps and a full analysis pointing out to them that the firmware in the CPE they provided me was broken. They decided to fix it by sending me a different model of CPE. I doubt they ever escalated it to actually fix the underlying problem in the original CPE. But if you happen to have a Technicolor TC7200, be wary of its DS-Lite implementation!) Cheers, Colin
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Benedikt, An idea: Next time you meet the folks encountering the problems, suggest them to google for "go6 nat64" and configure their resolver to one of Jan's NAT64 test DNS64s, and then turn off IPv4 on their host completely. If their life gets better it will be a very interesting and useful data point. --a > On 09 May 2016, at 22:09, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > Hi Ole and list, > > "Ole Troan (otroan)" writes: > >>> Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with >>> DS-Lite >> >> Any more details on that? >> New problems not mentioned in RFC6269? > > sorry I haven't got the time right now to review RFC6269 for what's > exactly mentioned there and what isn't, but: When I do IPv6 trainings > these days it's about one in eight who is struggling with their land > line access, which is based on DS-Lite and which reasonably well matches > the estimated percentage of DS-Lite on land lines. The problems are > however of a somewhat different nature than what RFC6269 addresses; they > are roughly these: > > - Various services don't work. Like STUN, and due to that, SIP. And > apparently various VPN solutions, too, but I never got access to any > details with this. The real culprit here seems to be restricted cone > NAT in the AFTR, plus apparently IPsec not working through DS-Lite. > > - There have been multiple reports that during peak hours there are > significant connection drops. The impact varies from user to user as > well as from ISP to ISP, apparently. Or as one user put it: "I solved > the problem. I just don't even try to access IPv4-only web pages on > saturday afternoons any longer." > > I don't have access to the AFTRs involved, so I can't reliably tell > what's happening there, but from the descriptions I got it looks like > some of them are actually running out of memory/CAM during peak hours > and start to drop the connections. This is economically plausible, > too, since the ISPs won't spend significant money on AFTR hardware > until problems have already shown up. > > - First level support is frequently completely helpless when confronted > with DS-Lite, or even IPv6 in general. > > The most annoying aspect here is that frequently it comes across that > "it's a problem with IPv6" and "if you keep complaining they'll switch > it off again for you" (i.e. they go back to IPv4-only connectivity > without restricted cone NAT). > > All the information I have here is largely based on anecdotal reports, > but enough of them for me to consider these problems anything but > isolated cases. > > > Cheers, > >Benedikt > > -- > Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting > Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ > > Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects > > BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ >
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Ole and list, "Ole Troan (otroan)" writes: >> Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with >> DS-Lite > > Any more details on that? > New problems not mentioned in RFC6269? sorry I haven't got the time right now to review RFC6269 for what's exactly mentioned there and what isn't, but: When I do IPv6 trainings these days it's about one in eight who is struggling with their land line access, which is based on DS-Lite and which reasonably well matches the estimated percentage of DS-Lite on land lines. The problems are however of a somewhat different nature than what RFC6269 addresses; they are roughly these: - Various services don't work. Like STUN, and due to that, SIP. And apparently various VPN solutions, too, but I never got access to any details with this. The real culprit here seems to be restricted cone NAT in the AFTR, plus apparently IPsec not working through DS-Lite. - There have been multiple reports that during peak hours there are significant connection drops. The impact varies from user to user as well as from ISP to ISP, apparently. Or as one user put it: "I solved the problem. I just don't even try to access IPv4-only web pages on saturday afternoons any longer." I don't have access to the AFTRs involved, so I can't reliably tell what's happening there, but from the descriptions I got it looks like some of them are actually running out of memory/CAM during peak hours and start to drop the connections. This is economically plausible, too, since the ISPs won't spend significant money on AFTR hardware until problems have already shown up. - First level support is frequently completely helpless when confronted with DS-Lite, or even IPv6 in general. The most annoying aspect here is that frequently it comes across that "it's a problem with IPv6" and "if you keep complaining they'll switch it off again for you" (i.e. they go back to IPv4-only connectivity without restricted cone NAT). All the information I have here is largely based on anecdotal reports, but enough of them for me to consider these problems anything but isolated cases. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
> Anno domini 2016 Benedikt Stockebrand scripsit: > > Hi, > > > > About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining > > > that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They > > > wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the > > > form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?" > > > > Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a > > problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been > > switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in > > some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about > > as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers > > never ever to come back. > > > > "*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!" > > > > "We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to > > us." > > That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context. > > I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around > today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't > know any. Does anyone have a good example here? > Not an example, but rather a dream - World IPv4 Outage Day ;-) > Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] > money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. > Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because > it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up > > What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy > this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ > peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high. > Don't anyone talk about diamonds now.. > > > > There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still > > > networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3]. > > > > And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 > > but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real > > problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking > > in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even > > enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't > > understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running. > > *sigh* > > Where's that drain cleaner? > > Best > Max > -- > <@Cord> *gnnn* unsre kleine Servermanufaktur hat wieder > zugeschlagen. > <@Cord> Java-Update... nun auf dem 10ten Server... alles glatt gegangen. > <@ixs> Cord: und das, meine damen und herren, ist warum sie automatisierung > kaufen sollten. damit sie auch > morgen noch kraftvoll adminstrieren koennen.. > -- Hrant Dadivanyan (aka Ran d'Adi)hrant(at)dadivanyan.net /* "Feci quod potui, faciant meliora potentes." */ ran(at)psg.com
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Max and list, Maximilian Wilhelm writes: >> "We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to >> us." > > That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context. that's why I like to quote it... > I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around > today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't > know any. Does anyone have a good example here? That's going to be difficult. If you run a service for money, making it v6only will cost you a lot of market share, so everybody still needs to support IPv4 in that kind of business. You can only expect that on sites run without regard for money by some hyperenthusiastic hobbyists. And frequently enough, enthusiasm is a bad substitute for competence. Things change drastically however if you talk about internal networks. There you can at least sometimes only make the servers dual stacked but connect the bulk mass of clients to either v4 or v6 only. > Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] > money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. > Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because > it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up No, don't give up. Try to be nice so they don't hold a grudge against you when the time comes, and then renegotiate your terms. Just make sure they don't blame you for not telling them. Sounds crazy, but that's how people sometimes tick: You tell them to watch out, they ignore you, things blow up in their face, so you should've warned---and protected---them, because after all you already knew beforehand. > What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy > this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ > peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high. When do people go to the dentist? When they can't stand the pain anymore. Or put differently: "As far as I can tell, everything works for me. So why should I allocate some of my limited resources to this?" >From a technically challenged business perspective it makes perfect sense. In some cases you might reason that fixing your WiFi takes at least three months (or whatever), will be necessary without prior warning, will incur significant extra cost and most importantly, also a loss/reduction of service lasting three months. Or put another way: If you wait until you notice that you're losing money, then you'll lose money. However: In most organizations management has got so used to being lied to with similar claims that they'll simply trust their own "experience". In other words: "As far as I can tell, everything works for me." Makes it rather hard to be heard. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Anno domini 2016 Benedikt Stockebrand scripsit: Hi, > > About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining > > that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They > > wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the > > form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?" > > Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a > problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been > switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in > some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about > as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers > never ever to come back. > > "*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!" > > "We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to > us." That's the dumbest and sadly most oftenly heared sentence in this context. I had hoped that there were some IPv6 only/broken IPv4 services around today that would show people that's not the way to go, but I don't know any. Does anyone have a good example here? Even in the educational sector where I work, where we have enough[tm] money for hardware and tutorials there's no interest in a useful deployment. Activating v6 in the 5k+ users wifi is delayed (again) for next year, because it's neither important or urgent. That's the point where I gave up What I absolutely fail to grasp is why people don't want to deploy this v6 stuff while they have a chance to do it without user/customer/ peer pressure but want to wait until the pressure gets too high. Don't anyone talk about diamonds now.. > > There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still > > networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3]. > > And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 > but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real > problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking > in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even > enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't > understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running. *sigh* Where's that drain cleaner? Best Max -- <@Cord> *gnnn* unsre kleine Servermanufaktur hat wieder zugeschlagen. <@Cord> Java-Update... nun auf dem 10ten Server... alles glatt gegangen. <@ixs> Cord: und das, meine damen und herren, ist warum sie automatisierung kaufen sollten. damit sie auch morgen noch kraftvoll adminstrieren koennen..
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Jens and list, Jens Link writes: > Sometimes IT is a world full of surprises and magic. Puff and it > 1999. Oh year 2000 is coming[1]. Puff and the support for Windows XP[2] > ends. Puff and there are only few IPv4 addresses left. Puff and many > access providers are doing some form of large scale NAT and maybe > IPv6. Puff and the solution we bought last year doesn't support > IPv6. But we need IPv6 now. These days, when I'm in the mood and I'm talking to the right people, I simply tell them: "I've decided to focus my work on IPv6 in 2003, and I'm still not sure if it was a smart decision. But the first time I negotiate a four digit hourly rate, then I'll know I was right." Occasionally that seems to get the message home. > About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining > that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They > wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the > form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?" Don't forget to mention their statement in that blog that "it's a problem between you and your ISP." Telling that to users who have been switched to DS-Lite (without their ISP even telling them, at least in some cases), and whose "land line" phone stopped working, that's about as good as it gets when you really, really, REALLY want some customers never ever to come back. "*Our* Internet works, so it must be yours that needs fixing!" "We have enough IPv4 addresses for ourselves, so this isn't a problem to us." > There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still > networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3]. And then there are those network projects that claim they support IPv6 but actually only do "IPv4 with longer addresses". But that's the real problem: There's a painful shortage of people who know about networking in general, but with IPv6 it's absolutely hopeless. There aren't even enough people who just memorized enough cookbook recipes they don't understand to get IPv6 (sort of) up and running. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Ivan Pepelnjak writes: > The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider > probably wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would > have to reimplement it for IPv6 I can't hear it anymore. Sometimes IT is a world full of surprises and magic. Puff and it 1999. Oh year 2000 is coming[1]. Puff and the support for Windows XP[2] ends. Puff and there are only few IPv4 addresses left. Puff and many access providers are doing some form of large scale NAT and maybe IPv6. Puff and the solution we bought last year doesn't support IPv6. But we need IPv6 now. About two years ago there was a large German VoIP provider complaining that all these evil German cable providers had started using IPv6. They wrote about it in an their BLOG. There were about 70 comments in the form of "Why don't you just provide IPv6?" There was a lot of time to see that IPv6 is coming. There are still networking projects today that are not build with IPv6 in mind[3]. Just my 2 cents. Jens [1] I attended an IT training in 1999 and the trainer ask "Anybody of you know COBOL? I told a customer about 20 years about y2k. He called last week." [2] Just mentioning this because I was hired by an Insurance company to do IPv6 consulting while some people behind my were managing the transition from XP to Windows 7. [3] "We never will need IPv6" or "We can add this later" are the most common answers I guess. -- | Foelderichstr. 40 | 13595 Berlin, Germany | +49-151-18721264 | | http://blog.quux.de | jabber: jensl...@quux.de| --- |
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi, On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 09:03:37PM +0200, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote: > The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider probably > wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would have to > reimplement it for IPv6 And this comes as total surprise to them exactly *why*? gert -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AGVorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
The problem is often internal networking. Every large cloud provider probably wrote their own overlay networking implementation, and would have to reimplement it for IPv6 Sent from my iPad > On 07 May 2016, at 20:35, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > Hi Sander and list, > > Sander Steffann writes: > >> [DS-Lite starting to hurt on the content side] >> >> It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their >> online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the >> major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their >> work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN. > > it is indeed. But banks are more IT-savvy and more security aware than > most other enterprises, so while the market is growing, it still is > surprisingly (and frustratingly) small. > > But it takes time for the word to spread, and more often than not people > mistake IPv6 for the actual problem, rather than IPv4 over DS-Lite etc. > >>> What I >>> find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a >>> huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution >>> on short notice. >> >> I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future >> if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by >> now... > > This is another one of those weird things. The CDNs to my knowledge > just got it up and running, but why on earth are the cloud providers > lagging behind? With regard to networking they are doing pretty much > the same: They host some customers stuff and make sure it is accessible > from around the world. > > Hmm. > > > Cheers, > >Benedikt > > -- > Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting > Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ > > Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects > > BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ >
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Sander and list, Sander Steffann writes: > [DS-Lite starting to hurt on the content side] > > It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their > online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the > major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their > work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN. it is indeed. But banks are more IT-savvy and more security aware than most other enterprises, so while the market is growing, it still is surprisingly (and frustratingly) small. But it takes time for the word to spread, and more often than not people mistake IPv6 for the actual problem, rather than IPv4 over DS-Lite etc. >> What I >> find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a >> huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution >> on short notice. > > I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future > if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by > now... This is another one of those weird things. The CDNs to my knowledge just got it up and running, but why on earth are the cloud providers lagging behind? With regard to networking they are doing pretty much the same: They host some customers stuff and make sure it is accessible from around the world. Hmm. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Benedict, > Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with > DS-Lite I still hope that at some point organizations providing content > (like webshops or such) will realize that they have to go IPv6. It is starting. I know of one bank that is enabling IPv6 on their online banking to avoid NAT444/DS-Lite/etc problems. For them the major problem is that their fraud detection algorithm can't do their work properly if everybody keeps coming in over CGN. > What I > find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a > huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution > on short notice. I agree. There could be a very nice market for them in the near future if they would support IPv6. The CDNs seem to have realised this by now... Cheers, Sander signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi, On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 05:03:35PM +, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > Shouldn't that be "have you disabled IPv4 on something today...?"? Have we reached that point already? Must have missed that while fixing IPv6 stuff :-) - so yeah, let's turn off IPv4! Now! Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AGVorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Dennis and list, Dennis Lundström writes: > Not very likely. In most cloud environments I've been exposed to > Business is the sole-driver to change. on a more serious note: That wouldn't actually be all bad, but it's the rather shortsighted manner of doing so. Considering the increasing reports of people having problems with DS-Lite I still hope that at some point organizations providing content (like webshops or such) will realize that they have to go IPv6. What I find plain weird is that the cloud providers don't realize this as a huge chance to get (and lock-in...) customers who need an IPv6 solution on short notice. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi Gert and list, Gert Doering writes: >> I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least >> battery acid. > > This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds? if not that, then what else could we suggest without risking to be told "sir, I suggest you walk" next time you want to fly somehwere? > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? Shouldn't that be "have you disabled IPv4 on something today...?"? Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Not very likely. In most cloud environments I've been exposed to Business is the sole-driver to change. Likewise when we are looking at billing-models per-hour-per-unit billing is effectively now turning your technical problems into business problems. As long as there is no major near-zombie-apocalypse business-driver for IPv6. We will continue enjoying the services and environments we deserve... Pass me the drain-cleaner. I too need a drink! --Dennis On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:16:51PM +, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least > > battery acid. > > This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds? > > cloud, cloud, cloud! > > *So* much space in the cloud for long IPv6 addresses! > > Gert Doering > -- troll > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AGVorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 >
Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 cloud!
Hi, On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 06:16:51PM +, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > I want a drink. And something strong. Like drain cleaner, or at least > battery acid. This will help clean IPv4 out of the clouds? cloud, cloud, cloud! *So* much space in the cloud for long IPv6 addresses! Gert Doering -- troll -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AGVorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
