Re: [WISPA] IPv6 Real or Bust?
Hi Steve, IPv6 is real.as is the need for it. The good news is that we'll get to benefit from work done internationally, as certain other countries are critically short of IPv4 space. Just when it will become something that is mandatory is still an open question. We've had a number of customers who are testing IPV6, but I'm not sure of anyone actually running it on their networks. Mostly it's being used internally on larger enterprise networks, as far as I've seen. There is a round-table on IPv6 at the WISPA program in Indy next week. Regards, Jeff ImageStream Sales Manager 800-813-5123 x106 _ From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Steve Barnes Sent: Friday, January 14, 2011 10:15 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] IPv6 Real or Bust? Fred, I thought about posting back to you all day yesterday and finally decided to. I agree that there will always be some sort of IPV4 out and available. They are constantly trying to get universities who were given huge blocks that have used less than 5% to relinquish parts of it. But as Tom DeReggi has stated that there is other benefits. I am not excited about being a bleeding edge adopter but I am looking forward to more training on this issue and being prepared for when there is a benefit for my clients. The reason I take this stance is I have been in the computer industry for 26 years. I know almost ever DOS command there is and can still write a pretty mean batch file menu system if needed in a pinch. One day my largest client at that time with 100 workstations and the new Novel 2.15 server asked me what I thought about this new Windows 2.86 software. I told him that it was all a fad why would you want to rum more than lotus 123 and WordPerfect. When Windows 3.0 came out I got a copy and started playing with it and I thought I might be wrong. I setup a meeting with that large company and told them I was wrong. They informed me that they already knew that and due to my short sidedness they had just signed a service agreement with another company. I lost a company that I had made $150K off of the previous year. I vowed to never look at future possibilities the same. Y2K was a bust but I made lots of money giving lectures telling people that I had no idea what was going to be happening but that all organizations needed to plan for emergencies and have back plans whether it was Y2K, a fire, an Ice storm, or a tornado. Same goes with IPV6. I am not sure what will happen or if it even will. But I need to have a plan to be ready no matter what comes. The federal government has set a directive to make all their networks IPV6 compliant by next year I believe. So if I want to be able to service their traffic then I have to have it. Steve Barnes RC-WiFi Wireless Internet Service -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 12:37 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Anyone running MT RB-750, UBNT gear doing IPv6? At 1/13/2011 11:59 AM, you wrote: I've got a small network with a MT RB-750 and UBNT (PS2's, NSL2's, NSLM5's, NSM5's and a BulletM2) and I'm wondering how we're going to fair if/when our upstream throws the switch on IPv6. I'd like to hear someone else is already doing it. Our upstream apparently is Hughesnet being resold in South America. I'm not sure if their system/our modem is IPv6 capable/ready. That may keep us on IPv4 and tunneled/nat'ed to IPv6 for some time. Personal opinion: IPv6 is worth less than the paper its RFC is printed on. Ignore it and it will go away. Really. I am very concerned being that only 2 percent of the IPv4 pool remains. http://ipv6.he.net/statistics/ In a few months we may not be able to get more IPv4 space. What then? NAT everyone? Ugh, with thousands of custommers thats an ugly proposition. How do you track down abuse, subpoena issues and so many other things... That's Y2K redux, a fear campaign. HE in particular is trying to use it as a differentiator. What is running out is virgin, never-before-assigned IPv4 space. It is like the land offices in the homestead era. Eventually they ran out of land. Yet farming continued. IPv4 addresses were initially handed out very inefficiently. There are many owners of blocks that are larger than needed. If you are qualified for a block, you are qualified to buy a block from someone who already has one. A market will happen, and I don't think it will be very expensive. Nor am I too concerned about NAT. NAT only breaks broken applications. Public servers need public addresses, but the mass market user doesn't. (Inability to handle subpoenas may be seen as an advantage...) Check out the Pouzin Society for an alternative. I've got some more on this on my web site. If one of your subscribers really needs to reach something only accessible via
Re: [WISPA] IPv6 Real or Bust?
At 1/14/2011 10:15 AM, Steve Barnes wrote: Fred, I thought about posting back to you all day yesterday and finally decided to. Glad you did. I don't mind taking unpopular views. I agree that there will always be some sort of IPV4 out and available. They are constantly trying to get universities who were given huge blocks that have used less than 5% to relinquish parts of it. But as Tom DeReggi has stated that there is other benefits. I am not excited about being a bleeding edge adopter but I am looking forward to more training on this issue and being prepared for when there is a benefit for my clients. WRT v4, since v6 lacks compatibility, we're stuck preserving v4 for everyone for a long time, so we should expect to use more CGNAT, and more efficient address assignment rules. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm not so sure that these other benefits are real, or require v6. I saw how IPv6 was created, and what the rules were at the time. It was a very sorry process. They had previously adopted a much better IPv7, but misbehaving children on the IETF made total arses of themselves (Lyman was getting about 70 phone calls *per hour*) and convinced IAB to reopen the issue. (Specifically, Vint changed his vote.) Their objection was purely poltical; IPv7 (TUBA) was based on IS8473, CLNP. And thus it was tainted, even though CLNP was the *good* part of the OSI program. The good people were then frustrated and left. The B-team put IPv6 together, starting with a silly rule that it should only fix the address space problem, not any fundamental architectural issues in IP (some of which were addressed by TUBA). So 17 years later, in a very different world, we have a very costly proposal with very limited benefits. I am (not here, but in other fora) proposing that we migrate away from TCP/IP per se and towards a newer protocol suite. What I'm backing is simpler than migrating to v6, coexists better with v4, and offers much more real benefits to its adopters (user and ISP alike). The reason I take this stance is I have been in the computer industry for 26 years. I know almost ever DOS command there is and can still write a pretty mean batch file menu system if needed in a pinch. One day my largest client at that time with 100 workstations and the new Novel 2.15 server asked me what I thought about this new Windows 2.86 software. I told him that it was all a fad why would you want to rum more than lotus 123 and WordPerfect. When Windows 3.0 came out I got a copy and started playing with it and I thought I might be wrong. I setup a meeting with that large company and told them I was wrong. They informed me that they already knew that and due to my short sidedness they had just signed a service agreement with another company. I lost a company that I had made $150K off of the previous year. I vowed to never look at future possibilities the same. Ironically, IPv6 was designed when Windows 3 was bleeding edge, Word Perfect dominated, and Novell was the king of networking. IP itself is older than MS-DOS. IPv6 is sort of like adding LIM expanded memory (remember that?) to DOS. It handles bigger data tables, but it's still DOS. Yes, customers may ask for it, so you may be stuck for a while supplying it, but that's no reason to embrace it as The Solution or spend a lot on it. Y2K was a bust but I made lots of money giving lectures telling people that I had no idea what was going to be happening but that all organizations needed to plan for emergencies and have back plans whether it was Y2K, a fire, an Ice storm, or a tornado. Same goes with IPV6. I am not sure what will happen or if it even will. But I need to have a plan to be ready no matter what comes. The federal government has set a directive to make all their networks IPV6 compliant by next year I believe. So if I want to be able to service their traffic then I have to have it. I remember the 1985 GOSIP requirement too. Government procurements had to be OSI compatible. So yeah, people made money selling it. But nobody actually used it... -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
Re: [WISPA] IPv6 Real or Bust?
good points Fred. I tend to look @ things differently 1. IPv7 is not here 2. IPv6 is Moving forward only helps all of us - and it is not a move 1 step forward and 2 steps back ... so in this case the vendors supporting IPV6 just makes sense. On Jan 14, 2011, at 11:32 AM, Fred Goldstein wrote: At 1/14/2011 10:15 AM, Steve Barnes wrote: Fred, I thought about posting back to you all day yesterday and finally decided to. Glad you did. I don't mind taking unpopular views. I agree that there will always be some sort of IPV4 out and available. They are constantly trying to get universities who were given huge blocks that have used less than 5% to relinquish parts of it. But as Tom DeReggi has stated that there is other benefits. I am not excited about being a bleeding edge adopter but I am looking forward to more training on this issue and being prepared for when there is a benefit for my clients. WRT v4, since v6 lacks compatibility, we're stuck preserving v4 for everyone for a long time, so we should expect to use more CGNAT, and more efficient address assignment rules. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'm not so sure that these other benefits are real, or require v6. I saw how IPv6 was created, and what the rules were at the time. It was a very sorry process. They had previously adopted a much better IPv7, but misbehaving children on the IETF made total arses of themselves (Lyman was getting about 70 phone calls *per hour*) and convinced IAB to reopen the issue. (Specifically, Vint changed his vote.) Their objection was purely poltical; IPv7 (TUBA) was based on IS8473, CLNP. And thus it was tainted, even though CLNP was the *good* part of the OSI program. The good people were then frustrated and left. The B-team put IPv6 together, starting with a silly rule that it should only fix the address space problem, not any fundamental architectural issues in IP (some of which were addressed by TUBA). So 17 years later, in a very different world, we have a very costly proposal with very limited benefits. I am (not here, but in other fora) proposing that we migrate away from TCP/IP per se and towards a newer protocol suite. What I'm backing is simpler than migrating to v6, coexists better with v4, and offers much more real benefits to its adopters (user and ISP alike). The reason I take this stance is I have been in the computer industry for 26 years. I know almost ever DOS command there is and can still write a pretty mean batch file menu system if needed in a pinch. One day my largest client at that time with 100 workstations and the new Novel 2.15 server asked me what I thought about this new Windows 2.86 software. I told him that it was all a fad why would you want to rum more than lotus 123 and WordPerfect. When Windows 3.0 came out I got a copy and started playing with it and I thought I might be wrong. I setup a meeting with that large company and told them I was wrong. They informed me that they already knew that and due to my short sidedness they had just signed a service agreement with another company. I lost a company that I had made $150K off of the previous year. I vowed to never look at future possibilities the same. Ironically, IPv6 was designed when Windows 3 was bleeding edge, Word Perfect dominated, and Novell was the king of networking. IP itself is older than MS-DOS. IPv6 is sort of like adding LIM expanded memory (remember that?) to DOS. It handles bigger data tables, but it's still DOS. Yes, customers may ask for it, so you may be stuck for a while supplying it, but that's no reason to embrace it as The Solution or spend a lot on it. Y2K was a bust but I made lots of money giving lectures telling people that I had no idea what was going to be happening but that all organizations needed to plan for emergencies and have back plans whether it was Y2K, a fire, an Ice storm, or a tornado. Same goes with IPV6. I am not sure what will happen or if it even will. But I need to have a plan to be ready no matter what comes. The federal government has set a directive to make all their networks IPV6 compliant by next year I believe. So if I want to be able to service their traffic then I have to have it. I remember the 1985 GOSIP requirement too. Government procurements had to be OSI compatible. So yeah, people made money selling it. But nobody actually used it... -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
Re: [WISPA] IPv6 Real or Bust?
At 1/14/2011 12:07 PM, Glenn Kelley wrote: good points Fred. I tend to look @ things differently 1. IPv7 is not here Ironically, at the time it was adopted, it had already been implemented in the major routers and many hosts. It was ready to go. (Of course it has been set aside since then, and we now know that it is not different enough from IP to be worth doing.) IPv6 was starting over from scratch. 2. IPv6 is Well, sort of. I don't think it's ready for prime time. Moving forward only helps all of us - and it is not a move 1 step forward and 2 steps back ... so in this case the vendors supporting IPV6 just makes sense. No, it's a move three steps mostly back, since IPv6 is technically the wrong direction. The problem is that people assume that IETF is somehow infallible, as if they were smarter than us, so we don't question their mistakes, even if we suspect them. -- Fred Goldsteink1io fgoldstein at ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
