Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joakim Aronius]

* Hannes Frederic Sowa (han...@mailcolloid.de) wrote:
> 
> But most people just don't care. My proposal is to have some kind of
> sane defaults for them e.g. changing their prefix every week or in the
> case of a reconnect. This would mitigate some of the many privacy
> concerns in the internet a little bit. Of course all the already known
> problems would still exist. And still people have to care about the
> technology to reach a higher level of anonymity.

Ok. Lets assume that the ISP hands out new prefixes to the clients CPE each 
week. The CPE then advertises these prefixes on the clients home network. For 
clients accessing the internet this works fine (except perhaps a glitch during 
the switchover). 

But what about the internal communication in the customer premises? How do they 
connect to their NAS, media players, printers, TVs etc? Of course there is 
UPnP, DLNA and different other kinds of magic but I imagine that most home 
users actually configure IP addresses at some point. 

Constantly changing prefixes will ad another layer of complexity, things will 
break, and customers will be upset. (and quite frankly I don't think that you 
would gain that much privacy anyway) 

just my $.02

/Joakim

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Owen DeLong]

On Aug 19, 2010, at 5:30 AM, Joakim Aronius wrote:

> * Hannes Frederic Sowa (han...@mailcolloid.de) wrote:
>> 
>> But most people just don't care. My proposal is to have some kind of
>> sane defaults for them e.g. changing their prefix every week or in the
>> case of a reconnect. This would mitigate some of the many privacy
>> concerns in the internet a little bit. Of course all the already known
>> problems would still exist. And still people have to care about the
>> technology to reach a higher level of anonymity.
> 
> Ok. Lets assume that the ISP hands out new prefixes to the clients CPE each 
> week. The CPE then advertises these prefixes on the clients home network. For 
> clients accessing the internet this works fine (except perhaps a glitch 
> during the switchover). 
> 
> But what about the internal communication in the customer premises? How do 
> they connect to their NAS, media players, printers, TVs etc? Of course there 
> is UPnP, DLNA and different other kinds of magic but I imagine that most home 
> users actually configure IP addresses at some point. 
> 
You actually imagine wrong in most cases. Many do, but, not most.

Most use mDNS for such things these days, actually.

> Constantly changing prefixes will ad another layer of complexity, things will 
> break, and customers will be upset. (and quite frankly I don't think that you 
> would gain that much privacy anyway) 
> 
I would agree. I think that customers that WANT privacy at the expense of 
having their prefix
change often being able to request such service might be a good value-add 
service you could
offer, but, I think the vast majority of customers would prefer prefix 
stability.

I think that the privacy implications of a stable prefix are vastly over-stated 
in this thread.

Owen

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Jack Bates]

Joakim Aronius wrote:
But what about the internal communication in the customer premises? How do they connect to their NAS, media players, printers, TVs etc? Of course there is UPnP, DLNA and different other kinds of magic but I imagine that most home users actually configure IP addresses at some point. 



The wise setup will use routed and non-routed addressing internally. 
This is how IPv6 was designed to handle it. Devices will be found 
through multicast, dynamic dns, or other means.



Jack

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 8/19/10 5:30 AM, Joakim Aronius wrote:
> * Hannes Frederic Sowa (han...@mailcolloid.de) wrote:
>>
>> But most people just don't care. My proposal is to have some kind of
>> sane defaults for them e.g. changing their prefix every week or in the
>> case of a reconnect. This would mitigate some of the many privacy
>> concerns in the internet a little bit. Of course all the already known
>> problems would still exist. And still people have to care about the
>> technology to reach a higher level of anonymity.
> 
> Ok. Lets assume that the ISP hands out new prefixes to the clients CPE each 
> week. The CPE then advertises these prefixes on the clients home network. For 
> clients accessing the internet this works fine (except perhaps a glitch 
> during the switchover). 
> 
> But what about the internal communication in the customer premises? How do 
> they connect to their NAS, media players, printers, TVs etc? Of course there 
> is UPnP, DLNA and different other kinds of magic but I imagine that most home 
> users actually configure IP addresses at some point. 

manual configuration of ip address name mappings seems like a rather low
priority for the average home user...

I don't expect that will be a big activity in the future either, more
devices means less manual intervention not more.

> Constantly changing prefixes will ad another layer of complexity, things will 
> break, and customers will be upset. (and quite frankly I don't think that you 
> would gain that much privacy anyway) 
> 
> just my $.02
> 
> /Joakim
> 
> 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joakim Aronius]

* Joel Jaeggli (joe...@bogus.com) wrote:
> 
> manual configuration of ip address name mappings seems like a rather low
> priority for the average home user...
> 
> I don't expect that will be a big activity in the future either, more
> devices means less manual intervention not more.
>

Ok, ok, so that argument sucked. I guess I'm still stuck in the IPv4 mindset 
and have not yet grasped the full blessing of IPv6, zeroconf etc. etc. 

Anyway, constantly changing prefixes for home users still seem like begging for 
trouble. (Could be a service though, as mentioned, but on the other hand I 
expect a fair number of anonymity services to arise so charging for it might be 
tough.)

Cheers,
/Joakim
 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Leen Besselink]

On 08/19/2010 07:58 PM, Joakim Aronius wrote:

* Joel Jaeggli (joe...@bogus.com) wrote:
   

manual configuration of ip address name mappings seems like a rather low
priority for the average home user...

I don't expect that will be a big activity in the future either, more
devices means less manual intervention not more.

 

Ok, ok, so that argument sucked. I guess I'm still stuck in the IPv4 mindset 
and have not yet grasped the full blessing of IPv6, zeroconf etc. etc.

Anyway, constantly changing prefixes for home users still seem like begging for 
trouble. (Could be a service though, as mentioned, but on the other hand I 
expect a fair number of anonymity services to arise so charging for it might be 
tough.)

Cheers,
/Joakim



   
If you still want fairly static addressing for your local network, there 
is always ULA.


And those addresses do not leak to the outside world.

I'm surprised no one mentioned it, maybe I missed it.

I can understand if people don't recommend them because you mentioned 
end-user, but it might be useful to a poweruser.


You could have your DSL- or cable-router/-modem onetime generate a ULA 
and have RA/DHCPv6 distribute that to the devices in the network like 
the addresses it gets from the provider.

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Mark Smith]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 14:30:07 +0200
Joakim Aronius  wrote:

> * Hannes Frederic Sowa (han...@mailcolloid.de) wrote:
> > 
> > But most people just don't care. My proposal is to have some kind of
> > sane defaults for them e.g. changing their prefix every week or in the
> > case of a reconnect. This would mitigate some of the many privacy
> > concerns in the internet a little bit. Of course all the already known
> > problems would still exist. And still people have to care about the
> > technology to reach a higher level of anonymity.
> 
> Ok. Lets assume that the ISP hands out new prefixes to the clients CPE each 
> week. The CPE then advertises these prefixes on the clients home network. For 
> clients accessing the internet this works fine (except perhaps a glitch 
> during the switchover). 
> 
> But what about the internal communication in the customer premises? How do 
> they connect to their NAS, media players, printers, TVs etc? Of course there 
> is UPnP, DLNA and different other kinds of magic but I imagine that most home 
> users actually configure IP addresses at some point. 
> 
> Constantly changing prefixes will ad another layer of complexity, things will 
> break, and customers will be upset. (and quite frankly I don't think that you 
> would gain that much privacy anyway) 
> 

ULA - RFC4193.

(People really need to stop thinking in IPv4 mode when discussing
IPv6 )


> just my $.02
> 
> /Joakim
> 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 8/18/10 4:20 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Mark Smith wrote:
>>> In IPv4-land I have the possibility to
>>> reconnect and get a new unrelated ip-address every time.
>>>
>>
>> They're issued by the same ISP, to they're related.
> 
> Ups. Unrelated in the sense of random ip from their pool, of course.

except of course that in practice if your lease hasn't expired and the
ip reassigned, or even if you manually release it you're very likely to
receive the same one.

> hannes
> 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 8/19/10 10:58 AM, Joakim Aronius wrote:
> * Joel Jaeggli (joe...@bogus.com) wrote:
>> 
>> manual configuration of ip address name mappings seems like a
>> rather low priority for the average home user...
>> 
>> I don't expect that will be a big activity in the future either,
>> more devices means less manual intervention not more.
>> 
> 
> Ok, ok, so that argument sucked. I guess I'm still stuck in the IPv4
> mindset and have not yet grasped the full blessing of IPv6, zeroconf
> etc. etc.

I'm not sure I'd characterize zeroconf, or rendezvous or anything other
technology for device mapping and discovery to be a blessing, that said
the use case for "take shiny new toy out of the box an plug it in is not
that different from the use case of device needs to discard it's old
mapping and use a new one.

> Anyway, constantly changing prefixes for home users still seem like
> begging for trouble. (Could be a service though, as mentioned, but on
> the other hand I expect a fair number of anonymity services to arise
> so charging for it might be tough.)

a device might get plugged in and be in the same location for the
entirety of it service life or it might move ever couple hours as a
number of increasing portable devices tend to do, the later set of
devices already cope with a lack of address stability fairly well and
pulling the run out from under them every once in a while supports
renumbering behavior...

I can remember early network printers using bootp and the assuming that
they could use that one ip address forever. today the printer will dhcp
and advertise it's availability in the same broadcast domain and may
well reregister it's name in dynamic dns if possible.

> Cheers, /Joakim
> 
> 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Mark Smith]

On Thu, 19 Aug 2010 01:35:50 +0200
Hannes Frederic Sowa  wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
> > Web portals work fine, and honestly, it's not like you need to switch
> > subnets, either. PPPoE/A implementations work great, as they are already
> > designed to utilize radius backends to quickly alter static/dynamic on a
> > session. For bridging setups, you have a variety of implementations and it
> > becomes messier. Cisco, while maintaining RBE did away with the concept of
> > proxy-nd, and didn't provide a mechanism for dynamically allocating the
> > prefixes to the unnumbered interface. If you use dslam level controls,
> > you'll most likely being using DHCPv6 TA addressing with PD on top of it,
> > which works well. Most of which can support quick static/dynamic
> > capabilities as it does with v4.
> 
> Thanks. I will have a deeper look in the standards. This sounds like a
> viable solution to me. Albeit, I wonder if there is a drive for the
> big ISPs to implement such features.
> 

Potentially it's a value add that small ISPs can use to distinguish
their basic packet transport services from their larger competitors. 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Owen DeLong]

> 
> I can remember early network printers using bootp and the assuming that
> they could use that one ip address forever. today the printer will dhcp
> and advertise it's availability in the same broadcast domain and may
> well reregister it's name in dynamic dns if possible.

Funny... I remember printers only thinking that if they were going to get
moved, they'd also likely get unplugged and get a new address after
the move.

Owen

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[Joel Jaeggli]

On 8/21/10 11:52 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>> I can remember early network printers using bootp and the assuming that
>> they could use that one ip address forever. today the printer will dhcp
>> and advertise it's availability in the same broadcast domain and may
>> well reregister it's name in dynamic dns if possible.
> 
> Funny... I remember printers only thinking that if they were going to get
> moved, they'd also likely get unplugged and get a new address after
> the move.

rfc 951 made no provision in the protocol for the recovery of an
address. you may well get a new one but the old one is assigned forever
until someone prunes the cruft

> Owen
> 

Re: end-user ipv6 deployment and concerns about privacy

[David W. Hankins]

On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 04:41:56PM -0500, Jack Bates wrote:
> prefixes to the unnumbered interface. If you use dslam level controls, 
> you'll most likely being using DHCPv6 TA addressing with PD on top of it, 
> which works well. Most of which can support quick static/dynamic 
> capabilities as it does with v4.

This is surprising to me, can you comment on why DHCPv6 TA is being
used in this scenario?

-- 
David W. HankinsBIND 10 needs more DHCP voices.
Software Engineer   There just aren't enough in our heads.
Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.   http://bind10.isc.org/


pgpTGtJ5BUH5I.pgp
Description: PGP signature

How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Graham Beneke]

Only 0.3 of a /8 left[1] before the rationing policy kicks in.

I hope everyone is ready :-)

[1] http://www.apnic.net/community/ipv4-exhaustion/graphical-information

--
Graham Beneke

The 4th Global IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey is underway!

[John Curran]

NANOGers -

If you have a moment, it would be helpful if you could complete the 4th
annual Global IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey.   Completion only
takes a few minutes, and the data from the survey is useful in tracking
progress and hurdles in IPv6 deployment.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

Begin forwarded message:

From: ARIN mailto:i...@arin.net>>
Subject: [arin-announce] The 4th Global IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey is 
Open Now
Date: July 1, 2013 8:00:32 AM EDT
To: mailto:arin-annou...@arin.net>>

Dear Community,

As in previous years, the Number Resource Organization (NRO) invites you to 
participate in the 4th consecutive Global IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey on 
the current and future use of IPv6.

The IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey is now online, and we encourage all 
members of our community to participate:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GlobalIPv6survey2013

The purpose of the survey is to better understand where the Internet community 
is going, and what can be done to ensure it is ready for the widespread 
adoption of IPv6. We hope this survey will establish a comprehensive view of 
current IPv6 penetration and future deployment plans for IPv6.

This year's survey is similar to those conducted in previous years (2010, 2011 
and 2012), and will enable a comparison of progress. What is clear is that 
community participation does contribute to a better understanding of how IPv6 
is being used. In 2012, 91% of the over 1,500 respondents indicated that they 
were interested in participating again in the 2013 survey.

This survey has a maximum of 30 questions and will take about 20 minutes to 
complete. For those without IPv6 allocations or assignments, or have not yet 
deployed IPv6, the questions will be fewer in number.

The survey will be open for a month and will close on 31 July 2013.

Results of the IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey will be presented and 
discussed widely, with the support of your Regional Internet Registry (RIR).

We appreciate your time and interest in completing this survey. If you have any 
questions concerning the survey, please send an email to i...@gnksconsult.com.

Regards,

Susan Hamlin
Director, Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
___
ARIN-Announce
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Announce Mailing List (arin-annou...@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-announce
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.

RIPE NCC does a series of interviews about IPv6 deployment

[Alex Band]

As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face  
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, I am proud to  
announce the first in a series of interviews.


Andy Davidson of NetSumo ISP Consultancy discusses the IPv6 deployment  
they have done for their customers and themselves:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU

So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about their  
experiences and are very busy editing all the video material. In the  
coming months, you will be able to enjoy the rest of the interviews  
here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RIPENCC

These interviews will also be published on our e-learning page and on  
our IPv6 Act Now website:

http://ripe.net/training/e-learning/
http://www.ipv6actnow.org/

Cheers,

Alex Band
RIPE NCC

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Marc Manthey]

Am 12.06.2009 um 19:05 schrieb Arno Meulenkamp:

As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face  
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud  
to announce the second in a series of interviews.


Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU


thanks  but thats not Randy Bush  its Andy Davidson

Randy Bushs Video is here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM

greetings


Marc




So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about their  
experiences and are very busy editing all the video material. In the  
coming months, you will be able to enjoy the rest of the interviews  
here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RIPENCC

These interviews will also be published on our e-learning page and  
on our IPv6 Act Now website:

http://ripe.net/training/e-learning/
http://www.ipv6actnow.org/

Cheers,

Arno Meulenkamp
RIPE NCC


--  
Les enfants teribbles - research / deployment

Marc Manthey
Vogelsangerstrasse 97
D - 50823 Köln - Germany
Vogelsangerstrasse 97
Geo: 50.945554, 6.920293
PGP/GnuPG: 0x1ac02f3296b12b4d
Tel.:0049-221-29891489
Mobil:0049-1577-3329231
web : http://www.let.de

Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and  
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).


Please note that according to the German law on data retention,  
information on every electronic information exchange with me is  
retained for a period of six months.

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Lucy Lynch]

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Arno Meulenkamp wrote:

As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face training 
and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud to announce the 
second in a series of interviews.


Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU


He got larger! And developed an accent... oh wait.

Randy here, but I enjoyed Andy as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM

So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about their 
experiences and are very busy editing all the video material. In the coming 
months, you will be able to enjoy the rest of the interviews here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RIPENCC

These interviews will also be published on our e-learning page and on our 
IPv6 Act Now website:

http://ripe.net/training/e-learning/
http://www.ipv6actnow.org/

Cheers,

Arno Meulenkamp
RIPE NCC

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Arno Meulenkamp]

On 12 Jun 2009, at 19:29 , Marc Manthey wrote:

thanks  but thats not Randy Bush  its Andy Davidson

Randy Bushs Video is here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM


you are right!

guess that tells me that cutting and pasting is dangerous.. thanks! :)


Arno


PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Ken A]

http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/http://youtube.com/
"It's not just you! http://youtube.com looks down from here."

Ken


Arno Meulenkamp wrote:
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face 
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are proud to 
announce the second in a series of interviews.


Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU

So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about their 
experiences and are very busy editing all the video material. In the 
coming months, you will be able to enjoy the rest of the interviews here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RIPENCC

These interviews will also be published on our e-learning page and on 
our IPv6 Act Now website:

http://ripe.net/training/e-learning/
http://www.ipv6actnow.org/

Cheers,

Arno Meulenkamp
RIPE NCC



--
Ken Anderson
Pacific Internet - http://www.pacific.net

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Marc Manthey]

Am 12.06.2009 um 20:59 schrieb Ken A:


http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/http://youtube.com/
"It's not just you! http://youtube.com looks down from here."


seems like a hickup :-)

Amazing that even such big sites , with a mega infrastructure, tons of  
servers and people behind it

can´t guarantee 100% uptime

greetings


marc


Ken


Arno Meulenkamp wrote:
As part of our IPv6 training project, that consists of face to face  
training and on-line learning modules and testimonials, we are  
proud to announce the second in a series of interviews.

Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU
So far, we have interviewed 22 people from the community about  
their experiences and are very busy editing all the video material.  
In the coming months, you will be able to enjoy the rest of the  
interviews here:

http://www.youtube.com/user/RIPENCC
These interviews will also be published on our e-learning page and  
on our IPv6 Act Now website:

http://ripe.net/training/e-learning/
http://www.ipv6actnow.org/
Cheers,
Arno Meulenkamp
RIPE NCC



--
Ken Anderson
Pacific Internet - http://www.pacific.net



--  
Les enfants teribbles - research / deployment

Marc Manthey
Vogelsangerstrasse 97
D - 50823 Köln - Germany
Vogelsangerstrasse 97
Geo: 50.945554, 6.920293
PGP/GnuPG: 0x1ac02f3296b12b4d
Tel.:0049-221-29891489
Mobil:0049-1577-3329231
web : http://www.let.de

Opinions expressed may not even be mine by the time you read them, and  
certainly don't reflect those of any other entity (legal or otherwise).


Please note that according to the German law on data retention,  
information on every electronic information exchange with me is  
retained for a period of six months.

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Jorge Amodio]

> Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU

Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
different.

Marvelous technologies of these days ...

Cheers

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Randy Bush]

> Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
> different.

it was the duct tape

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Jorge Amodio]

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> Wow !!!, Randy with the anti-grumpyness filter sounds and looks quite
>> different.
>
> it was the duct tape

He, he, BTW your interview was really good.

Hope some folks get the point that besides many of the challenges to
transition to v6 the real deal is what you put very clearly in just one word:
 "experience".

Cheers

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Antonio Querubin]

On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Jorge Amodio wrote:


Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU


The correct URL is http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM

Antonio Querubin
whois:  AQ7-ARIN

Re: RIPE NCC interview about IPv6 deployment with Randy Bush

[Andy Davidson]

On 12 Jun 2009, at 19:03, Lucy Lynch wrote:


On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Arno Meulenkamp wrote:

Randy Bush (IIJ) discusses IPv6 deployment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCcigLJJbvU

He got larger!


Randy is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM


Best wishes
Andy Davidson
Officially larger than Randy Bush.

OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Franck Martin]

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100409_oecd_reports_on_state_of_ipv6_deployment_for_policy_makers/
 

FW: [ipv6-wg] 2010 IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey Now Underway

[Mark Kosters]

ARIN encourages its community to participate in the 2010 Global IPv6 
Deployment Monitoring Survey being conducted by GNKS Consult and TNO and 
sponsored by the RIPE NCC.

The survey is now available at:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/IPv6deploymentmonitoring2010

The survey will close on 1 July 2010.

All five Regional Internet Registries have committed to soliciting 
participation in this survey in order to compile the most complete 
global IPv6 deployment data possible.

The survey results will provide a better understanding of current IPv6 
deployment, and what still needs to be done to ensure the Internet 
community is ready for the widespread adoption of IPv6. ARIN/CAIDA 
performed a similar survey in 2008, and it was repeated in 2009 in the 
RIPE and APNIC regions. The 2010 survey will allow for some comparison 
of progress, which will be extremely valuable in determining the 
necessary next steps.

The goal is to establish a comprehensive view of present IPv6 
penetration and future plans for IPv6 deployment. The survey is composed 
of 23 questions and can be completed in about 15 minutes. For those 
without IPv6 allocations or assignments, or who have not yet deployed 
IPv6, the questions will be fewer in number.

Results of the IPv6 Deployment Monitoring Survey will be made public in 
the fall. All participants that provide their name and contact 
information on the survey form will receive the draft survey analysis 
when available. Please also indicate if you are willing to share 
additional data with the TNO and GNKS Consult IPv6 Deployment Monitoring 
team.

Any questions concerning the survey itself should be addressed to 
.

Regards,

Mark Kosters
ARIN CTO

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Tore Anderson]

* Graham Beneke

> Only 0.3 of a /8 left[1] before the rationing policy kicks in.

Hi,

Actually, they're already empty. Chinanet Fujian Province Network
allocated 498432 addresses today, spread out over 1102(!) individual
prefixes in the range /21-/24.

Unless any resources has been returned to the free pool today, there's
nothing left in the APNIC pool outside of the 103/8 block, which is the
one set aside for the final /8 policy.

Best regards,
-- 
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com
Tel: +47 21 54 41 27

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 14 apr 2011, at 8:33, Tore Anderson wrote:

> Actually, they're already empty. Chinanet Fujian Province Network
> allocated 498432 addresses today, spread out over 1102(!) individual
> prefixes in the range /21-/24.

Where do you see this? On ftp.apnic.net I see delegated-apnic-20110414 which 
only contains info upto the 13th and has a timestamp of Apr 13 15:15.

Based on that file, APNIC still has 17.57 million regular + 2.27 M legacy = 
19.84 M total address space, so another 0.5 M wouldn't deplete what's left.

I also don't get what they did two days ago:

inetnum:39.192.0.0 - 39.255.255.255
netname:Debogon-prefix
descr:  APNIC Debogon Project

This is address space that's now marked as delegated and removed from the pile 
of unused address space for no obvious reason.

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Tore Anderson]

* Iljitsch van Beijnum

> On 14 apr 2011, at 8:33, Tore Anderson wrote:
> 
>> Actually, they're already empty. Chinanet Fujian Province Network 
>> allocated 498432 addresses today, spread out over 1102(!)
>> individual prefixes in the range /21-/24.
> 
> Where do you see this? On ftp.apnic.net I see
> delegated-apnic-20110414 which only contains info upto the 13th and
> has a timestamp of Apr 13 15:15.
> 
> Based on that file, APNIC still has 17.57 million regular + 2.27 M
> legacy = 19.84 M total address space, so another 0.5 M wouldn't
> deplete what's left.

Hi,

APNIC has for some time now made available an extended version of the
delegated file that explicitly says which blocks are available:

ftp://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/stats/apnic/delegated-apnic-extended-latest

Disregarding 103/8, there were 1104 remaining available prefixes before
APNIC's offices opened today. Now they're closed, and by looking in
whois.apnic.net I can tell that every single one of the prefixes that
were marked in the delegated-extended file as available is now allocated
- 1102 of them to Chinanet Fujian Province Network, and two
(106.0.32.0/19 and 116.90.0.0/18) to the APNIC Debogon Project.

So unless some new blocks (for example returned space) has made it into
the free pool today, they are down to their last /8. Actually, they're a
bit under one /8, as there's been some assignments made to the Debogon
Project in 103/8 already.

> I also don't get what they did two days ago:
> 
> inetnum:39.192.0.0 - 39.255.255.255
> netname:Debogon-prefix
> descr:  APNIC Debogon Project
> 
> This is address space that's now marked as delegated and removed from
> the pile of unused address space for no obvious reason.

I believe they are using those prefixes for research. According to the
APNIC whois database, 53 individual assignments have been made to the
Debogon Project (including the three we've mentioned). In any case, when
looking at the graph at

http://www.apnic.net/community/ipv4-exhaustion/graphical-information

and the delegated-extended file, it appears that these prefixes do count
as assigned space like any other assignment. I would assume that when
the research project is over, they will be returned to the free pool and
assigned under the last /8 policy just like any other space that enters
the pool after the last /8 policy has been implemented.

Best regards,
-- 
Tore Anderson
Redpill Linpro AS - http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Tel: +47 21 54 41 27

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 14 apr 2011, at 13:50, Tore Anderson wrote:

>> This is address space that's now marked as delegated and removed from
>> the pile of unused address space for no obvious reason.

> I believe they are using those prefixes for research.

> and the delegated-extended file, it appears that these prefixes do count
> as assigned space like any other assignment. I would assume that when
> the research project is over, they will be returned to the free pool and
> assigned under the last /8 policy

That is extremely curious. How can they justify taking 4 million addresses for 
research two days before running out of regularly allocatable address space? 
They could have taken that /10 out of the final /8 rather than taking it from 
the last scraps of regular space if they really need a /10 for research, which 
is already dubious in and of itself.

Of course they didn't bother to respond to my request for information about all 
of this.

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Rubens Kuhl]

> That is extremely curious. How can they justify taking 4 million addresses 
> for research two days before running out of regularly allocatable address 
> space? They could have taken that /10 out of the final /8 rather than taking 
> it from the last scraps of regular space if they really need a /10 for 
> research, which is already dubious in and of itself.

Debogon usually means they will establish beacons to detect networks
that will incorrectly filter that block, and is an indication that
such block will soon start being distributed to LIRs.


Rubens

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Owen DeLong]

On Apr 14, 2011, at 5:47 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 14 apr 2011, at 13:50, Tore Anderson wrote:
> 
>>> This is address space that's now marked as delegated and removed from
>>> the pile of unused address space for no obvious reason.
> 
>> I believe they are using those prefixes for research.
> 
>> and the delegated-extended file, it appears that these prefixes do count
>> as assigned space like any other assignment. I would assume that when
>> the research project is over, they will be returned to the free pool and
>> assigned under the last /8 policy
> 
> That is extremely curious. How can they justify taking 4 million addresses 
> for research two days before running out of regularly allocatable address 
> space? They could have taken that /10 out of the final /8 rather than taking 
> it from the last scraps of regular space if they really need a /10 for 
> research, which is already dubious in and of itself.
> 
> Of course they didn't bother to respond to my request for information about 
> all of this.
> 

I believe that rather than research, those are prefixes which are particularly 
"dirty" and
they have allocated them to the project to try and get them cleaned up so that 
they can
be subsequently issued.

Owen

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 14 apr 2011, at 13:02, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> Based on that file, APNIC still has 17.57 million regular + 2.27 M legacy = 
> 19.84 M total address space, so another 0.5 M wouldn't deplete what's left.

I just got the 15 apr file which has the info for 14 apr (sigh...) and indeed 
1100 blocks adding up to 0.52 million addresses were given out today. And that 
still leaves 2.27 million legacy addresses available, including all of 
43.224.0.0/11 except 43.244 and 43.253, as well as 0.34 million non-legacy, 
non-103/8 addresses.

103/8 is apparently going to be the special final /8. It's still wide open 
except a /16, a /22 and a /24 that are registered to the debogon project (as of 
a week and a half ago).

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Franck Martin]

Recently, Microsoft Australia has been refused a temp allocation (like
they had every year) for one of their conferences.

On 4/15/11 9:01 , "Iljitsch van Beijnum"  wrote:

>On 14 apr 2011, at 13:02, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
>
>> Based on that file, APNIC still has 17.57 million regular + 2.27 M
>>legacy = 19.84 M total address space, so another 0.5 M wouldn't deplete
>>what's left.
>
>I just got the 15 apr file which has the info for 14 apr (sigh...) and
>indeed 1100 blocks adding up to 0.52 million addresses were given out
>today. And that still leaves 2.27 million legacy addresses available,
>including all of 43.224.0.0/11 except 43.244 and 43.253, as well as 0.34
>million non-legacy, non-103/8 addresses.
>
>103/8 is apparently going to be the special final /8. It's still wide
>open except a /16, a /22 and a /24 that are registered to the debogon
>project (as of a week and a half ago).

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Skeeve Stevens]

All… as of early this morning, APNIC is empty.

Last /8 Policy is now in effect.


...Skeeve



--

Skeeve Stevens, CEO - eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists

ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net

Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellego or eintell...@facebook.com

twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve

PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia


--

eintellego - The Experts that the Experts call

- Juniper - HP Networking - Cisco - Brocade - Arista - Allied Telesis

On 15/04/11 7:01 AM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" 
mailto:iljit...@muada.com>> wrote:

On 14 apr 2011, at 13:02, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

Based on that file, APNIC still has 17.57 million regular + 2.27 M legacy = 
19.84 M total address space, so another 0.5 M wouldn't deplete what's left.

I just got the 15 apr file which has the info for 14 apr (sigh...) and indeed 
1100 blocks adding up to 0.52 million addresses were given out today. And that 
still leaves 2.27 million legacy addresses available, including all of 
43.224.0.0/11 except 43.244 and 43.253, as well as 0.34 million non-legacy, 
non-103/8 addresses.

103/8 is apparently going to be the special final /8. It's still wide open 
except a /16, a /22 and a /24 that are registered to the debogon project (as of 
a week and a half ago).

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 15 apr 2011, at 0:04, Skeeve Stevens wrote:

> All… as of early this morning, APNIC is empty.

Why do you say that? Do you have information that contradicts my numbers?

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Skeeve Stevens]

Just an email from APNIC 3 hours ago to all regional mailing lists.

Kinda authoritative I would say.

---

On 15/04/11 6:25 AM, "APNIC Secretariat" 
mailto:apnic-no-re...@apnic.net>> wrote:


___

APNIC IPv4 Address Pool Reaches Final /8
___


Dear APNIC community

We are writing to inform you that as of Friday, 15 April 2011, the APNIC
pool reached the Final /8 IPv4 address block, bringing us to Stage Three
of IPv4 exhaustion in the Asia Pacific. For more information about Stage
Three, please refer to:

http://www.apnic.net/ipv4-exhaustion/stages


Last /8 address policy
--

IPv4 requests will now be assessed under section 9.10 in "Policies
for IPv4 address space management in the Asia Pacific region":

 http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy#9.10

APNIC's objective during Stage Three is to provide IPv4 address space
for new entrants to the market and for those deploying IPv6.

 http://www.apnic.net/ipv4-stage3-faq

>From now, all new and existing APNIC account holders will be entitled
to receive a maximum allocation of a /22 from the Final /8 address
space.

For more details on the eligibility criteria according to the Final /8
policy, please refer to:

http://www.apnic.net/criteria


Act NOW on IPv6
---

We encourage Asia Pacific Internet community members to deploy IPv6
within their organizations. You can refer to APNIC for information
regarding IPv6 deployment, statistics, training, and related regional
policies at:

http://www.apnic.net/ipv6

To apply for IPv6 addresses now, please visit:

http://www.apnic.net/kickstart


___

APNIC Secretariat 
secretar...@apnic.net<mailto:secretar...@apnic.net>
Asia Pacific NetworkInformation Centre (APNIC)   Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 AustraliaFax: +61 7 3858 3199
6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD
http://www.apnic.net<http://www.apnic.net/>
___
* Sent by email to save paper. Print only if necessary.


---



...Skeeve



--

Skeeve Stevens, CEO - eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists

ske...@eintellego.net ; www.eintellego.net

Phone: 1300 753 383 ; Fax: (+612) 8572 9954

Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/eintellego or eintell...@facebook.com

twitter.com/networkceoau ; www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve

PO Box 7726, Baulkham Hills, NSW 1755 Australia


--

eintellego - The Experts that the Experts call

- Juniper - HP Networking - Cisco - Brocade - Arista - Allied Telesis

On 15/04/11 8:09 AM, "Iljitsch van Beijnum" 
mailto:iljit...@muada.com>> wrote:

On 15 apr 2011, at 0:04, Skeeve Stevens wrote:

All… as of early this morning, APNIC is empty.

Why do you say that? Do you have information that contradicts my numbers?

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Geoff Huston]

On 14/04/2011, at 10:47 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 14 apr 2011, at 13:50, Tore Anderson wrote:
> 
>>> This is address space that's now marked as delegated and removed from
>>> the pile of unused address space for no obvious reason.
> 
>> I believe they are using those prefixes for research.
> 
>> and the delegated-extended file, it appears that these prefixes do count
>> as assigned space like any other assignment. I would assume that when
>> the research project is over, they will be returned to the free pool and
>> assigned under the last /8 policy
> 
> That is extremely curious. How can they justify taking 4 million addresses 
> for research two days before running out of regularly allocatable address 
> space? They could have taken that /10 out of the final /8 rather than taking 
> it from the last scraps of regular space if they really need a /10 for 
> research, which is already dubious in and of itself.
> 
> Of course they didn't bother to respond to my request for information about 
> all of this.
> 
> 


The addresses were "in flight" to the recipient and got caught up in a set of 
scripted processes that inappropriately assigned them into the debogon project 
for a couple of days while some related administrative processes were underway.

Our apologies for the temporary confusion --  and we promise do better next 
time! :-)

And yes, APNIC is indeed  down to the last /8   - 
 contains the announcement

Also, our apologies for not getting back to Iljitsch's request for information 
sooner - we have been somewhat busy in the last few days!

thanks,

 Geoff

Re: How is IPv6 deployment going in the APNIC region?

[Iljitsch van Beijnum]

On 15 apr 2011, at 12:21, Geoff Huston wrote:

> The addresses were "in flight" to the recipient and got caught up in a set of 
> scripted processes that inappropriately assigned them into the debogon 
> project for a couple of days while some related administrative processes were 
> underway.

> Our apologies for the temporary confusion --  and we promise do better next 
> time! :-)

Thanks for the clarification. But I hope you're not planning on running out of 
IPv6 anytime soon... Or maybe you're getting at 16-bit AS numbers?

> And yes, APNIC is indeed  down to the last /8

Hm, I still see 2.27 million legacy addresses as free, mostly 43.224.0.0/11 
except 43.244 and 43.253, as well as 0.34 million non-legacy. Why don't these 
count and/or what will happen to them?

Iljitsch

2012 Global IPv6 Deployment Survey - Please take a moment to complete!

[John Curran]

NANOG Folks -

   IPv6 - You may love it (or hate it) but either way it would be good to take
   just a few moments to complete the Global IPv6 Deployment Survey
   (see attached).The survey is being conducted in cooperation with the
   Regional Internet Registries in order to better understand IPv6 deployment
   trends.

   Global IPv6 Deployment Survey: 
<https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GlobalIPv6survey2012>

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

===

Global IPv6 Deployment Survey Extended to 13 July 2012

Our thanks to those who have completed the 2012 IPv6 Deployment Monitoring
Survey. If you have not yet participated, there is still time! The survey
has been extended to Friday, 13 July. If you haven¹t yet, we would
appreciate if you could take a few minutes to complete the survey
at:  https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GlobalIPv6survey2012

The purpose of the survey is to better understand what can be done to
increase IPv6 adoption worldwide. The findings from the 2012 survey will
be compared to previous years to give a perspective on progress in various
regions and globally.

For those interested, the results of last year's survey are available at:
http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/ipv6_deployment_survey.pdf.
The results will be presented and discussed widely. Please provide your
name and contact information on the survey form if you wish to receive the
draft survey analysis when available. Please also indicate whether you are
willing to share additional data with the TNO and GNKS Consult IPv6
Deployment Monitoring team.

We appreciate your time and interest in completing this survey. If you
have any questions concerning the survey, please send an email to:
i...@gnksconsult.com<mailto:i...@gnksconsult.com>

Regards,

Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Randy Bush]

> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100409_oecd_reports_on_state_of_ipv6_deployment_for_policy_makers/
>  

karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen in
it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/8/44961688.pdf

randy

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Jorge Amodio]

> karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen in
> it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.

On of the best parts of her presentation:

"Government’s role *is not about regulation*, but about working with
technical experts and business to:
•Role 1: Build awareness of issue & help to ease bottlenecks through
multi-stakeholder co-operation.
•Role 2: Being early adopters.
•Role 3: International co-operation and helping to monitor progress of
deployment."

Will they get it any day ?

Regards
Jorge

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Franck Martin]

You should have seen the CNN experiment on cyber attack...

It took 3/4 of the time for the "government" to realize they need to ask the 
private sector to help them. The first 3/4 were spent to discuss what the 
president can do or not do so they can take over the infrastructure and tell 
the operators what to do...

- Original Message -
From: "Jorge Amodio" 
To: "Randy Bush" 
Cc: "Franck Martin" , nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Saturday, 10 April, 2010 4:49:18 PM
Subject: Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

> karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen
> in it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.

On of the best parts of her presentation:

"Government’s role *is not about regulation*, but about working with
technical experts and business to:
•Role 1: Build awareness of issue & help to ease bottlenecks through
multi-stakeholder co-operation.
•Role 2: Being early adopters.
•Role 3: International co-operation and helping to monitor progress of
deployment."

Will they get it any day ?

Regards
Jorge

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Randy Bush]

> You should have seen the CNN experiment on cyber attack...

you mean the failed chertoff/cheney wanna make the news clueless crap?
puhleeze!  the fcc has more guns than that mob had clue.

randy

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Larry Sheldon]

On 4/9/2010 23:23, Franck Martin wrote:
> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20100409_oecd_reports_on_state_of_ipv6_deployment_for_policy_makers/
>  
> 
Nasty, degenerate, foot-dragging U.S. of A. does it again.

-- 
Somebody should have said:
A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner.

Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting
the vote.

Requiescas in pace o email
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio
Eppure si rinfresca

ICBM Targeting Information:  http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs
http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

On 4/10/10 1:42 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> You should have seen the CNN experiment on cyber attack...
> 
> you mean the failed chertoff/cheney wanna make the news clueless crap?
> puhleeze!  the fcc has more guns than that mob had clue.


unfortunately, the failed chertoff/cheney celebrants of the
"cybersecurity" cult have managed one significant outplacement.

eric

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[William Herrin]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
> karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen in
> it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.
>
> http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/8/44961688.pdf

John,

I'd like to call your attention to slide 8, the chart showing growth
in fully working IPv6 deployments. Should that growth trend be allowed
to continue, IPv4-only deployments can be expected to fall into the
minority after another few hundred years.

The upcoming conversion of IPv4 addressing into a zero-sum game (as a
result of free pool depletion) is likely to increase this growth
trend, but it's anybody's guess whether the new growth trend improves
to something with a faster-than-linear feedback loop. And of course
once free pool depletion hits, the cost to deploy additional IPv4
systems starts to grow immediately, independent of pre-majority IPv6
growth.

We might want to consider additional public policy incentives to kick
the IPv6 growth rate into a higher gear.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin  her...@dirtside.com  b...@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. .. Web: 
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Owen DeLong]

On Apr 10, 2010, at 9:40 AM, William Herrin wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>> karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen in
>> it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.
>> 
>> http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/8/44961688.pdf
> 
> John,
> 
> I'd like to call your attention to slide 8, the chart showing growth
> in fully working IPv6 deployments. Should that growth trend be allowed
> to continue, IPv4-only deployments can be expected to fall into the
> minority after another few hundred years.
> 

> The upcoming conversion of IPv4 addressing into a zero-sum game (as a
> result of free pool depletion) is likely to increase this growth
> trend, but it's anybody's guess whether the new growth trend improves
> to something with a faster-than-linear feedback loop. And of course
> once free pool depletion hits, the cost to deploy additional IPv4
> systems starts to grow immediately, independent of pre-majority IPv6
> growth.
> 
In fact, IPv6 is already showing greater than linear acceleration in
deployment, so, even though IPv4 hasn't run out yet, people are
beginning to catch on.

> We might want to consider additional public policy incentives to kick
> the IPv6 growth rate into a higher gear.
> 
Such as?

Owen

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Tim Durack]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>
> On Apr 10, 2010, at 9:40 AM, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 12:31 AM, Randy Bush  wrote:
>>> karine perset's work is, as usual, good enough that it should be seen in
>>> it's original, not some circle-je^h^hid hack of a small part of it.
>>>
>>> http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/8/44961688.pdf
>>
>> John,
>>
>> I'd like to call your attention to slide 8, the chart showing growth
>> in fully working IPv6 deployments. Should that growth trend be allowed
>> to continue, IPv4-only deployments can be expected to fall into the
>> minority after another few hundred years.
>>
>
>> The upcoming conversion of IPv4 addressing into a zero-sum game (as a
>> result of free pool depletion) is likely to increase this growth
>> trend, but it's anybody's guess whether the new growth trend improves
>> to something with a faster-than-linear feedback loop. And of course
>> once free pool depletion hits, the cost to deploy additional IPv4
>> systems starts to grow immediately, independent of pre-majority IPv6
>> growth.
>>
> In fact, IPv6 is already showing greater than linear acceleration in
> deployment, so, even though IPv4 hasn't run out yet, people are
> beginning to catch on.
>
>> We might want to consider additional public policy incentives to kick
>> the IPv6 growth rate into a higher gear.
>>
> Such as?
>
> Owen
>
>
>

Notify all holders of a currently active AS they have been
allocated/assigned a /32. No fees. No questions.

To accept the allocation/assignment, it must be advertised within a 24
month period.

There is no shortage of available /32s in 2000::/3. There is a serious
shortage of meaningful deployment.

-- 
Tim:>

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Nick Hilliard]

On 10/04/2010 21:36, Tim Durack wrote:
> Notify all holders of a currently active AS they have been
> allocated/assigned a /32. No fees. No questions.
> 
> To accept the allocation/assignment, it must be advertised within a 24
> month period.
> 
> There is no shortage of available /32s in 2000::/3. There is a serious
> shortage of meaningful deployment.

I'm puzzled as to why you might think that this would incentivise
meaningful deployment of ipv6.

Nick

Re: OECD Reports on State of IPv6 Deployment for Policy Makers

[Tim Durack]

On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
>
> I'm puzzled as to why you might think that this would incentivise
> meaningful deployment of ipv6.
>
> Nick
>
>

It removes the hurdle of working with the RIR and/or getting
management buy-in to go negotiate for number resources.

(Our personal experience as a community/end-user network is that ARIN
wants justification for the minimum address space one can live with.
At this early stage of deployment, that raises concerns over whether
we have a workable address plan in place. We worked with ARIN to
eventually get a /41 assigned. With the prospect of assigning /56s to
every customer port we have on an edge switch, that's not going to
last long. You can probably argue we got the initial request wrong,
but it still means we have to go back and negotiate again, which we
haven't found to be much fun. That's holding us back.)

-- 
Tim:>

Interview: Patrik Fältström on the role of go vernment in IPv6 deployment

[Alex Band]

We uploaded another interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrE1TEan4Jo

To make sure we cover as many areas of the industry as possible, we  
asked Patrik Fältström on the role of government in IPv6 deployment.  
Patrik is Senior Consulting Engineer with Cisco, but has served as an  
advisor to the Swedish government on IT policy since 2003. In the  
interview, he makes a note about the American government as well.


I hope you enjoy it. If you have feedback on specific topics you would  
like to see covered in future interviews, please let us know. We  
appreciate your comments.


Alex Band
RIPE NCC

What would a Step-by-Step Framework for Planning an IPv6 Deployment Look Like?

[Mukom Akong T.]

Hello all,

One of the questions I often get asked during after teaching/facilitating
and IPv6 session is: "Now I know all these tech bits and how they come
together, but what are the steps for deploying IPv6?"

I've often scratched my head because I thought 'that's obvious', however I
gave have detailed and have decided to provide a framework that anyone
could use and would like to get critiques and suggestions on how to improve
this for folks looking how to kickstart their IPv6 deployment project.

http://techxcellence.net/2013/01/28/step-by-step-framework-for-planning-ipv6-deployment/

Surprisingly, these are very familiar steps that almost everyone who has
done a project in the past can relate to. The steps are:


   1. Set Clear Goals for the IPv6 Deployment Project.
   2. Identify the List of Tasks Required to Achieve each Goal.
   3. Identify Resources Required to Accomplish each Task.
   4. Get Management Approval/Sign-off for the Project.
   5. Execute the Plan, Documenting Everything as you go.
   6. Update Relevant Organisational Processes to Integrate new
   Capabilities Resulting from the Deployment.

These are quite obvious steps, however what each of them means and the
thought process required to clarify each is what have detailed. I'd like
your comments and also your suggestions on what you can do to move your
IPv6 Deployment project from and "incomplete pile of unclear stuff" to and
organised set of tasks that will surely lead you towards a working IPv6
deployment? Please share.

Regards and have a wonderful week!

[Disclaimer]: Like with all my posts, ALL opinions are mine and do not
necessary represent the views or positions of any of my professional
affiliations.

Mukom Akong T.

http://about.me/perfexcellence |  twitter: @perfexcellent
--
“When you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of the
hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran
---

Re: WEBCAST: Is Asia Pacific and China doing well on IPv6 Deployment? - just started

[Joly MacFie]

>
> **
>
>[image: isoc-hk] <http://isoc.hk>The Internet Society's Hong Kong
> Chapter (ISOC HK <http://www.isoc.hk/>), continuing its pioneering series
> of IPv6 events, will mark today June 6 2012 Global IPv6 Launch with a
> seminar: 'Is Asia Pacific and China doing well on IPv6 
> Deployment?<http://www.isoc.hk/2012/04/world-ipv6-launch-x-ipv6-in-action-x-ipv6worldasia-jun-6-12.html>'.
> Featured speakers include Geoff Huston of APNIC who will talk about "The
> Post - IPocalypse Internet", and Walter Fung of NTT who will address "IPv6
> on Cloud in Asia Pacific". Since HK is EDT+12 the live webcast has just
> begun.
>
> *What:* Is Asia Pacific and China doing well on IPv6 Deployment?
> * Where:* Cyberport Hong Kong
> *When:* Weds Jun 6 2012 2pm-5.30pm HKT|0600-0930UTC|0200-0530EDT
> *Webcast:* http://www.livestream.com/internetsocietychapters
> *Hashtags*: #v6launch <http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23v6launch> | 
> #ipv6<http://twitter.com/#!/search?q=%23ipv6>|
> @isochk <https://twitter.com/#!/search/realtime/%40isochk>
> * More info:* http://www.isoc.hk/
>
>  Comment <http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=3541#respond>See all 
> comments<http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=3541#comments>
>
>
>  *Trouble clicking?* Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
> http://isoc-ny.org/p2/?p=3541
>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
>  WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
>  http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
>
>  VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
> --
> -
>



-- 
---
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--
-