Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
And just how are you going to make all of us small ISPs, or the big ones for that matter, do that? I don't disagree with you, but I think the conversation needs to continue assuming that is not going to happen. And that may not be what happens within a large organization that uses private connections to consolidate connects to the Internet. On 8/2/2011 1:17 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: en1: flags=8863UP,BROADCAST,SMART,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 ether 60:33:4b:01:75:85 inet6 fe80::6233:4bff:fe01:7585%en1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5 inet 192.168.191.223 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.191.255 inet6 fd92:7065:b8e::6233:4bff:fe01:7585 prefixlen 64 autoconf inet6 2001:470:1f00:820:6233:4bff:fe01:7585 prefixlen 64 autoconf media: autoselect status: active Note the multiple prefixes. IPv6 is not just IPv4 with bigger addresses. If you want to give your printers, etc. stable IPv6 addesses use ULAs. Icky. Better yet, just subscribe to an ISP that will give you a static prefix. Owen -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 (765) 439-4253 (855) 231-6239
Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers
this service and enough people won't pay it that we will be fighting these problems for a long time. Some businesses will pay it and some won't but the home user will probably not. Amusingly, I have, so far, refused to pay it to Comcast on my business class service. Every once in a while, they renumber my address and I have to reconfigure my tunnel. (I'm using commodity internet access for layer 2 transport into my home. The BGP is done between my home router and routers in colo facilities via GRE). these 3 items make a case for everybody having a ULA. however while many of the technical bent will be able to manage multiple addresses I know how much tech support I'll be providing my parents with either an IP address that goes away/changes or multiple IP addresses. I'll set them up on a ULA so there is consistency. No, they don't. They make a great case for giving people static GUA. These are businesses were talking about. They are not going to give anything away. Interesting… Hurricane Electric is a business. We give away IPv6 /48s to tunnel broker users. In fact, we give away IPv6 transit services and tunnel access. I see lots of businesses giving things away to try and gain market advantage and customer awareness all the time. Why do you think that a business would not do so, given the overwhelming evidence to the contrary? Complain about NAT all you want but NAT + RFC 1918 addressing in IPv4 made things such as these much nicer in a home and business setting. No, it really didn't. If IPv4 had contained enough addresses we probably wouldn't have always-on dynamic connections in the first place. Debatable but not worth an argument. Having said that the ability to 1) not have to renumber internal address space on changing ISPs 2) not having to give a printer (or other device with no security) a public IP address or run multiple addressing schemes and the security implications there of 3) change the internals of my network without worrying about the world are all important and critical issues for me. Addressing != security. This issue has definitely been rehashed on here several times and the reality is that you can have just as secure a permit/deny policy with just as much of a default deny with public addresses as you can without them. The difference, of course, is that with public addresses, you have the option of creating permit rules that may not be possible with private addresses depending on your particular implementation (or lack thereof) of address translation. 1. Multihome and get portable GUA, problem solved. If it's actually important to you, this is easy. 2. Since you can give it a public address and still block access between the internet and it if you so choose (I actually find it rather convenient to be able to print at home and the only extra crap that comes out of my printer so far arrives via the telephone line and the G3 protocol, not via IP), public GUA does not change the nature of this issue. 3. I can change the internals of my network without worrying about the world. I'm not sure why you think I can't. Frankly, this claim makes no sense to me whatsoever. I realize that these arguments are at layers 8 9 of the OSI model (politics and religion) but that does not make them less real nor less important. They are not the same issues that ISP operators may normally have to deal with but they are crucial to business operators. The DSCP/RA arguments are of the same criticality and importance. Agreed. However, misinformation and FUD remains misinformation and FUD regardless of the ISO protocol layer in question. Owen -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060 (765) 439-4253 (855) 231-6239
Re: Some truth about Comcast - WikiLeaks style
Check out http://www.wispdirectory.com Go to Contact Us and fill out the form. If you are only a mile away from a WISP, there is a chance they will build out to you. On 12/20/2010 6:14 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote: Where I live, about 50 miles south of Atlanta down I-85, there is no consumer broadband at all. Satellite, Cellular, and T-1, those are my options. A mile away, there are choices, but not here. I am sure we aren't the only neighborhood in this situation, even today. On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Randy Carpenterrcar...@network1.netwrote: And yet, I don't know of any location in the US with two cable operators. We have 2 separate cable providers in our town. One of them is a division of the local telephone company, but it is still CATV plant. The telco also operates a FTTH service with IPTV video as well. The result is that the big national CATV provider had incredibly good rates for a long time, and even after they were more than doubled, are still really good. -Randy -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060
Re: IPv6 Routing table will be bloated?
Why would the assumption be the ISP = knowledgeable or even caring about RIRs, etc.? When I started my ISP 6 years ago I knew someone issued IP addresses to my upstream provider, but I really didn't care who that was. The upstream took care of everything related to getting and assigning addresses as far as I was concerned. Even when I changed upstream providers they took care of the addresses. It was at that time I realized I need to learn more about the whole IP address assignment process so I wouldn't have to renumber next time I changed providers. I dug far enough to find that my ISP was not big enough to get an assignment and the required fee was more than the cost to renumber, so I didn't look any farther. So, as a log of start-ups and small businesses do, I learned enough to make what I needed work, but not everything that may have been beneficial. On 10/26/2010 3:20 PM, George Bonser wrote: -Original Message- From: Jack Bates [mailto:jba...@brightok.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 11:23 AM To: Randy Carpenter Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 Routing table will be bloated? On 10/26/2010 1:01 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote: Wait... If you are issuing space to ISPs that are multihomed, they should be getting their own addresses. Even if they aren't multihomed, they should probably be getting their own addresses. Why would you be supplying them with address space if they are an ISP? Because they are my customer. They don't know much about RIRs, paying membership fees, etc. They just know they want address space, and I provide that. If they are ISPs and don't know much about RIRs, can you please name them and provide their ASNs ... oh, wait ... they won't have an ASN if they don't know about RIRs and fees and such. Something isn't passing the smell test here. -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060
Re: ipv6 vs. LAMP
Public or not, if someone wants to run IPv6 only, they shouldn't have to have the v4 stack just for the database. Databases must work on the v6 stack. On 10/22/2010 10:02 AM, Carlos Martinez-Cagnazzo wrote: IMHO you should never, ever make your MySQL accesible over the public Internet, which renders the issue of MySQL not supporting IPv6 correctly mostly irrelevant. You could even run your MySQL behind your web backend using RFC1918 space (something I do recommend). Moreover, if you need direct access to the engine, you can trivially create an SSH tunnel (You can even do this in a point-and-click way using the latest MySQL Workbench). SSH works over IPv6 just fine. And for the LAMP stack, as long as the A fully supports IPv6 (which it does), we are fine. Warm regards, Carlos On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 8:06 PM, Joel Jaegglijoe...@bogus.com wrote: On 10/21/10 2:59 PM, Brandon Galbraith wrote: On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Dan Whitedwh...@olp.net wrote: On 21/10/10 14:43 -0700, Leo Bicknell wrote: In a message written on Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 01:53:49PM -0700, Christopher McCrory wrote: open to the world. After a few google searches, it seems that PostgreSQL is in a similar situation. I don't know when PostgreSQL first supported IPv6, but it works just fine. I just fired up a stock FreeBSD 8.1 system and built the Postgres 8.4 port with no changes, and viola: All this is pretty moot point if you run a localized copy of your database (mysql or postgres) and connect via unix domains sockets. True. It mostly affects shared/smaller hosting providers who have customers that want direct access to the database remotely over the public network (and don't want to use some local admin tool such as phpMyAdmin). linux/unix machines can trivially build ip-tunnels of several flavors. -brandon -- Scott Reed Owner NewWays Networking, LLC Wireless Networking Network Design, Installation and Administration Mikrotik Advanced Certified www.nwwnet.net (765) 855-1060
