RE: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption
-Original Message- From: Jack Bates [mailto:jba...@brightok.net] Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:12 PM To: Franck Martin Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption On 10/18/2010 3:51 PM, Franck Martin wrote: So they can't run their own services from home and have to request premium connectivity from you? Beside the IPv4 scarcity mentality we have the Telco mentality to fight... Happy days still ahead... Of course they can run their own services at home. How does renumber effect that (outside of poor v6 implementations at this late stage)? v6 is designed to support multiple prefixes and the ability to change from one prefix to another with limited disruption, especially if I give 24 hours to complete the transition. If servers and services can't handle this, I'd say they need to improve, or the customer will need a static allocation, which we may or may not charge for (depending on how automated we make it). A sane default of rotation is appropriate for us, though, and no amount of fighting by anyone will make the Telco think that google or others have the right to track their users. It's unfair for our users who block cookies, do due diligence to not be tracked, and then we throw them to the wolves with a constant trackable prefix. HS: Where customers = spammers? The only folks I have seen ask to do 'address rotation' have either been spammers or copyright monitoring services. I have never seen a request for 'address rotation' to protect a customer from Google. Wouldn't you just tell them not to use Google's services? The *typical* residential user doesn't know and probably doesn't care whether their prefix is dynamic or static. Dynamic allocation of address space was, in part, meant to help conserve space - if the prefix was only needed for a couple hours, it could in theory be released and reused... allowing more efficient utilization of space. Now though, with always-on connections and folks wanting to access their content remotely - it makes sense to statically allocate prefixes... and the availability of addresses in IPv6 gives us the room to do this. Jack (knew this would start an argument. *sigh*)
RE: v6 bgp peer costs?
We do not charge v4 customers anything to turn up an IPv6 tunnel. If you hear otherwise, please feel free to drop me a line. Native v6 is available in atleast 31 markets, on over 210 edge devices in 701. There is a good chance that native v6 is available for most, or close enough to rehome to a v6 capable device. If native isn't available you should be offered a tunnel for free. I'm happy to try to help anyone with VZ (701/702/703/14551) with their IPv6 issues. --Heather ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Heather Schiller Network Security - Verizon Business 1.800.900.0241secur...@verizonbusiness.com -Original Message- From: Zaid Ali [mailto:z...@zaidali.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 3:08 PM To: NANOG list Subject: v6 bgp peer costs? I currently have a v4 BGP session with AS 701 and recently requested a v6 BGP session to which I was told a tunnel session will be provided (Same circuit would be better but whatever!). Towards the final stage in discussions I was told that it will cost $1500. I find this quite ridiculous and it will certainly not motivate people to move to v6 if providers put a direct price tag on it. I am going through a bandwidth reseller though so I am not sure who is trying to jack me here. Has anyone here gone through a similar experience? Thanks, Zaid
RE: Inquiries to Acquire IPs
+2 so far here.. Same email, same guy, different netblocks. Spamming for IP's to spam with? --heather ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Heather Schiller Network Security - Verizon Business 1.800.900.0241secur...@verizonbusiness.com -Original Message- From: Crist Clark [mailto:crist.cl...@globalstar.com] Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 2:47 PM To: Nanog Subject: Inquiries to Acquire IPs We got a strange and out of the blue inquiry from someone wishing to pay us for a chunk of our ARIN allocation, Hello, According to Whois data, you company owns the following IP address space: 206.220.220.0/24 We would like to get this block of IP addresses for our business needs. Is it possible to assign this block for our company with PI (Provider Independent) or PA (Provider Assigned) status? We ready to pay about $5,000 for the net block itself and all related procedures. Would you be interested in such an offer? The amount of compensation is subject to negotiation. We're not interested, mostly because we use our allocation, but also because I think this is not allowed by our agreement with ARIN. Seems a bit fishy. I should add the sender identified himself and his company clearly. It wasn't from some free mail account. (Although it could of course be spoofed.) Is this a new thing? IP speculation as we come upon free pool depletion? A front for spammers?
Geolocation contact for Bing/Microsoft?
Can someone from Bing/MS contact me about correcting Geolocation info for some IP's. Folks are erroneously getting redirected - and I can't find any info about how to get it fixed. Thanks, --Heather ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Heather Schiller Network Security - Verizon Business 1.800.900.0241secur...@verizonbusiness.com
RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
-Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 4:14 PM To: John Payne Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space On Apr 8, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Joe Greco wrote: IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years to come. So again, why do WE have to encourage YOU to adopt IPv6? Why should WE care what you do to the point of creating new rules so YOU don't have to pay like everyone else? Flip it around: Why should WE care about IPv6? WE would have to sign an onerous RSA with ARIN, giving up some of our rights in the process. WE have sufficient IP space to sit it out awhile; by doing that, WE save cash in a tight economy. WE are not so large that we spend four figures without batting an eyelash, so that's attractive. You don't. No one is going to make you set up IPv6. If you don't ever want or need to reach v6 enabled hosts, that's fine... Depending on your business, you may never need to change. But maybe someday you will want to, and you can set up v6 then. For a lot of folks, especially ISP's and content providers, there is much to be gained by deploying early: operational experience, and competitive advantage. It may not all go smoothly, so the sooner folks who know they will need IPv6, get started, the more time they have to work out any kinks. I think that is one of the interesting things about this problem. Unlike y2k, the deadline is different for everyone - and depends a lot on what your business is. Seriously? an onerous RSA What, specifically, do you consider so onerous? Are there no other situations where you willingly give up certain rights in order to obtain a service, or for the betterment or stability of your community/society? When you purchase internet transit, you surely sign a contract that has some terms of service, including an Acceptable Use Policy. You likely give up the right to spam, host copyrighted works, the right to intentionally disrupt networks, etc. It's likely that your provider can terminate services for violations. Do you consider this onerous? Even if you did, it didn't stop you from purchasing service. Further, anyone who is providing IPv6-only content has cut off most of the Internet, so basically no significant content is available on IPv6- only. That means there is no motivation for US to jump on the IPv6 bandwagon. Even more, anyone who is on an IPv6-only eyeball network is cut off from most of the content of the Internet; this means that ISP's will be having to provide IPv6-to-v4 services. Either they'll be good, or if customers complain, WE will be telling them how badly their ISP sucks. *I* am personally convinced that IPv6 is great, but on the other hand, I do not see so much value in v6 that I am prepared to compel the budgeting for ARIN v6 fees, especially since someone from ARIN just described all the ways in which they fritter away money. You can get IPv6 addresses from your upstream provider, often times free of charge, you don't ever have to deal with ARIN if you don't want to. You won't ever have tosign and agreement with ARIN if you don't want to. But, if you want to get a direct allocation, you got to pay to play - and also, agree to play by the same rules that everyone else is - it's a social contract of sorts- give up some rights in order to gain some benefits. As a result, the state of affairs simply retards the uptake and adoption of v6 among networks that would otherwise be agreeable to the idea; so, tell me, do you see that as being beneficial to the Internet community at large, or not? Note that I'm taking a strongly opposing stance for the sake of debate, the reality is a bit softer. Given a moderately good offer, we'd almost certainly adopt IPv6. Moderately good offer Like getting a prefix from your provider? Probably for free, without signing anything from ARIN. Have you talked to your provider? Or a certain well known tunnel broker will give you a /48 along w/ a free tunnel. http://nlayer.net/ipv6 route-views6.routeviews.org sh bgp ipv6 2001:0590::::::/32 BGP routing table entry for 2001:590::/32 Paths: (15 available, best #6, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) Not advertised to any peer 33437 6939 4436 2001:4810::1 from 2001:4810::1 (66.117.34.140) Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external Last update: Thu Apr 8 20:43:30 2010 ... JG -- Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I won't contact you again. - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN) With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.
RE: interop show network (was: legacy /8)
Might want to double check you aren't filtering, as parts of 1/8 and 2/8 have been intermittently announced by RIR's in debogonizing efforts over the last few months. Routing wise, this really isn't different from the space being assigned - better to clear up any filtering and identify routing problems or renumbering efforts you may need now before the space gets allocated, probably later this year. In fact, parts of 2/8 are being announced right now for debogon-izing: route-viewssh ip bgp 2.0.0.0/8 longer-prefixes BGP table version is 2323163774, local router ID is 128.223.51.103 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete Network Next HopMetric LocPrf Weight Path * 2.0.0.0/16 194.85.102.33 0 3277 3267 30132 12654 I --Heather -Original Message- From: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) [mailto:nan...@adns.net] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 7:37 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: interop show network (was: legacy /8) When do you think that 1/8, 2/8 and 50/8 will start showing up as live, assigned addresses. I don't see any of them coming in on my core routers yet. - Original Message - From: Leo Vegoda leo.veg...@icann.org To: Jon Lewis jle...@lewis.org Cc: nanog@nanog.org Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 1:04 PM Subject: Re: interop show network (was: legacy /8) On 5 Apr 2010, at 9:13, Jon Lewis wrote: On Sun, 4 Apr 2010, Christopher Morrow wrote: [...] If we could recover them all, how many more years of IPv4 allocations would that buy us? We allocate RIRs approximately one /8 per month. So you'd have to reclaim 12 /8s to extend the allocation pool by one year. Regards, Leo
RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
ARIN Region IPv6 fee waiver: https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html#waivers In Jan 2008, the Board of Trustees decided to reduce the fee waiver incrementally over a period of 4 years. Full fees will be in effect in 2012. Can you provide rationalization why anyone should automatically get any kind of allocation? Or why legacy holders should have equivalent [IPv6] space under the same terms You can read through past iterations of this discussion over in the PPML archives. --Heather -Original Message- From: John Palmer (NANOG Acct) [mailto:nan...@adns.net] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 12:10 PM To: NANOG list Subject: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to those who have IP4 legacy space. Isn't there an automatic allocation for those of us who have legacy IP space. If not, is ARIN saying we have to pay them a fee to use IP6? Isn't this a disincentive for us to move up to IP6? Those with legacy IP4 space should have the equivalent IP6 space under the same terms. Or am I missing something?
RE: How polluted is 1/8?
14/8 isn't all they are using internally.. 1,4,5,42 and that's just the stuff that hasn't been delegated out by IANA yet. I am sure this practice is pervasive.. and it's an issue that doesn't typically come up in talks about prepping for IPv4 depletion. Maybe it will now.. FWIW, I don't believe these netblocks are completely unusable. If RIR policies permit you to get address space for private networks, it could be allocated to an organization that understands and accepts the pollution issue because they will never intend to route the space publicly. (Such a thing does exist..) +1 volunteering to sink traffic for 1.1.1.0/24 --heather -Original Message- From: Joel Jaeggli [mailto:joe...@bogus.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:09 AM To: Mirjam Kuehne Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: How polluted is 1/8? It should be of no surprise to anyone that a number of the remaining prefixes are something of a mess(somebody ask t-mobile how they're using 14/8 internally for example). One's new ipv4 assignments are going to be of significantly lower quality than the one received a decade ago, The property is probably transitive in that the overall quality of the ipv4 unicast space is declining... The way to reduce the entropy in a system is to pump more energy in, there's always the question however of whether that's even worth it or not. joel Mirjam Kuehne wrote: Hello, After 1/8 was allocated to APNIC last week, the RIPE NCC did some measurements to find out how polluted this block really is. See some surprising results on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/content/pollution-18 Please also note the call for feedback at the bottom of the article. Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC
