Well my suggestion was less in the realm of imposing changes in policy
and more in the realm of providing resources (even if just as a nexus)
and fora to help promote IPv6 adoption, brainstorm the problem.
There is a cross-disciplinary aspect to this, it's not only a network
engineering and opera
Not residential IPv6 connectivity but today I got this news:
http://www.ourmidland.com/prweb/cirrushosting-to-support-ipv-on-canadian-vps-and-cloud-hosting/article_4d28a39c-1c3f-5209-939b-10d8cf310564.html
El 6/18/2014 7:46 PM, Sadiq Saif escribió:
> On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
>> Cana
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>
>
> On 6/19/14 4:30 PM, "Christopher Morrow" wrote:
>
>>On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>>>
>>> How does IPv6 to end users make IPv4 unnecessary for growth, if
>>> enterprises and content providers haven't deployed IPv6?
>>
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 10:47 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
.
> Ideally, it would be nice if the UNH/IOL and/or CEA could come up with a
> meaningful definition of IPv6 support and a logo to go with it that we could
> tell consumers to look for on the box. Ideally, this would be a set of
> standar
On Jun 19, 2014, at 7:41 PM, Markus wrote:
> http://blog.cari.net/carisirt-yet-another-bmc-vulnerability-and-some-added-extras/
>
> = simple telnet commands displays passwords of BMCs. Damn Supermicro, please
> hire some new programmers! :(
>
And here I was hoping it would be something usefu
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:46:11PM -0500, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 6/19/2014 5:14 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> > and cut the
> >tea party fanaticism.
>
> What might this mean in this context (IP) and environment (NANOG)?
Death to the lemon we
On 6/19/2014 5:14 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
and cut the
tea party fanaticism.
What might this mean in this context (IP) and environment (NANOG)?
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
It depends on how you define Nexus.
Currently the way number resource policy works is that global policy requires
an identical policy
be put through the policy development process in each of the 5 regional
internet registries and
adopted by all 5. It is then sent to the ASO AC (an elected body
http://blog.cari.net/carisirt-yet-another-bmc-vulnerability-and-some-added-extras/
= simple telnet commands displays passwords of BMCs. Damn Supermicro,
please hire some new programmers! :(
On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 15:55 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> With a small amount of conceptual knowledge, the differences between
> IPv4 and IPv6 become very very small.
True story: At a previous employer, a local admin had pushed his network
over 250-odd PCs and wanted more addresses. So we extended h
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you read the rest of my post, you would realize that I wasn't arguing
to give out addresses to every person and their dog, but instead arguing
that trying to shift bits to the right would be costly and pointless
because there are more than enough bits
On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:27 , Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:17:29 -0400, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Let's figure each person needs an end site for their place of business,
>> their two cars, their home, their vacation home, and just for good measure,
>> let's double that to be ultra-con
On Jun 19, 2014, at 10:53 , Edward Arthurs wrote:
> Thank You for responding.
> If mid to small companies have equipment made in the last 7 years, they will
> not need to replace equipment.
> Most net admins at the mid to small companies have no idea about IPV6.
> Cost is a major consideration
On Jun 19, 2014, at 10:51 , Barry Shein wrote:
>
> On June 19, 2014 at 04:01 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote:
>> ICANN != a good sampling of number resource issues or concerns.
>>
>> As you noticed, the whole mess with domain names and their IP issues
>> is the monetary tail that wags the
On Jun 19, 2014, at 07:02 , Lee Howard wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> I support a recommendation to consumer retailers to start requiring IPv6
>>> support in the stuff that they sell, but unfortunately I don¹t have very
>>> good data on how large of a request that actually is.
>>
>> In my experience, r
On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:48 , Harald Koch wrote:
> On 19 June 2014 14:07, Daniel Ankers wrote:
>
>>
>> How does it use those 6 /64s? That seems to be getting towards the
>> interesting times where the way devices work with v6 is very different to
>> how they would have worked with v6
>>
>
>
> Any suggestions on how ARIN should reach those CIO's in the meantime?
> (so as to reduce the number who experience such surprise) We've done
> some attempts at outreach to that community, and have advice from PR
> firms, etc., but I'm interested in a more "real world" perspective on
> getting th
On 6/19/14 5:02 PM, "John Curran" wrote:
>On Jun 19, 2014, at 4:27 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:35:55 -0400, John Curran
>>wrote:
>>> Any suggestions on how ARIN should reach those CIO's in the meantime?
>>
>> Refuse additional IPv4 assignments to those who have not dep
On 6/19/14 4:30 PM, "Christopher Morrow" wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>>
>> How does IPv6 to end users make IPv4 unnecessary for growth, if
>> enterprises and content providers haven't deployed IPv6?
>
>content folk are mostly getting v6 done already, right? (minu
On Jun 19, 2014, at 4:27 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:35:55 -0400, John Curran wrote:
>> Any suggestions on how ARIN should reach those CIO's in the meantime?
>
> Refuse additional IPv4 assignments to those who have not deployed IPv6. And
> not just been assigned a v6 block,
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 12:21:12 -0400, Justin M. Streiner
wrote:
How much IPv6 space would you propose an ISP provisions for each of its
residential users?
A single /64 would, currently, be sufficient for 99% of households. The
link can be /128, /127, /64, whatever -- between ISP and CPE does
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Lee Howard wrote:
>
> How does IPv6 to end users make IPv4 unnecessary for growth, if
> enterprises and content providers haven't deployed IPv6?
content folk are mostly getting v6 done already, right? (minus AWS/etc
which are on-plan to deploy as near as I can tel
On 6/19/14 2:50 PM, "Christopher Morrow" wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Edward Arthurs
> wrote:
>> You are correct, but this is the tip of the iceberg as other
>>configurations will need to come into play as pointed out by several
>>people on this thread.
>> This learning curve is not
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:35:55 -0400, John Curran wrote:
Any suggestions on how ARIN should reach those CIO's in the meantime?
Refuse additional IPv4 assignments to those who have not deployed IPv6.
And not just been assigned a v6 block, but actually running IPv6 to every
customer who asks
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 15:59:34 -0400, Barry Shein said:
> But I thought ICANN was supposed to be the new and future nexus for
> all things internet governance?
Oh, come on Barry. This isn't your first rodeo, and I know you're *way*
too smart to believe that press releases align with reality...
pg
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 19:07:48 +0100, Daniel Ankers said:
> How does it use those 6 /64s? That seems to be getting towards the
> interesting times where the way devices work with v6 is very different to
> how they would have worked with v6
If I remember right, it's:
Private net on the 2.4ghz radi
But I thought ICANN was supposed to be the new and future nexus for
all things internet governance?
On June 19, 2014 at 13:57 morrowc.li...@gmail.com (Christopher Morrow) wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
> >
> > Really. You're really completely discounting ICANN in
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Ricky Beam wrote:
Can we stop with the lame "every person, and their dog!" numbering plans. The
same MISTAKE has been repeated so many times in recent history you'd think
people would know better. It's the exact same wrong-think that was applied to
the 32bit IPv4 addressin
That is a good question and I wish I had a good answer. I'm trying to beat
the drums where I work for IPv6 and it is tough because nobody has thought
about it and in our situation I actuallly have a good case. We develop
mobile apps and with the amount of IPv6 VZW and T-mobile are doing having
at
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Edward Arthurs
wrote:
> You are correct, but this is the tip of the iceberg as other configurations
> will need to come into play as pointed out by several people on this thread.
> This learning curve is not impossible, if the net admin really applies
> his/her s
On 19 June 2014 14:07, Daniel Ankers wrote:
>
> How does it use those 6 /64s? That seems to be getting towards the
> interesting times where the way devices work with v6 is very different to
> how they would have worked with v6
>
Bridging between (slow) 802.11 and (fast) ethernet is hard to do
On 14-06-18 06:16 PM, Sadiq Saif wrote:
On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment.
Any Canadian ISP folk in here want to shine a light on this dearth of
residential IPv6 connectivity?
For that matter, how about on the other side of the equation. Why is
On Jun 19, 2014, at 2:02 PM, Daniel Ankers wrote:
> One of the key things with IPv6 (IMHO) is to stop thinking about addresses,
> and instead just think about networks. Judging by Owen's earlier mail I
> may not have that quite right and the key might even be to think about
> hierarchies - in e
On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:27 AM, Brian Hartsfield wrote:
> ... While it isn't the end of the world when ARIN runs out, it is still
> significant
> and I personally think that moment is going to be what starts to spur more
> CIOs to
> start asking questions about IPv6 and if their organization is
On 06/19/2014 02:07 PM, Daniel Ankers wrote:
On 19 June 2014 18:19, wrote:
My WNDR3800 running cerowrt is quite able to use up the /60 Comcast hands me
(it burns 6 /64s by default the instant you turn it on, and can burn more
if
you start doing VLAN'ing or other config stuff).
How does i
You are correct, but this is the tip of the iceberg as other configurations
will need to come into play as pointed out by several people on this thread.
This learning curve is not impossible, if the net admin really applies his/her
self to learning it.
Thank You
-Original Message-
From:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:17:29 -0400, Owen DeLong wrote:
Let's figure each person needs an end site for their place of business,
their two cars, their home, their vacation home, and just for good
measure, let's double that to be ultra-conservative. That's 10 end-sites
per person or 101 billio
On 19 June 2014 18:19, wrote:
>
>
My WNDR3800 running cerowrt is quite able to use up the /60 Comcast hands me
> (it burns 6 /64s by default the instant you turn it on, and can burn more
> if
> you start doing VLAN'ing or other config stuff).
>
>
How does it use those 6 /64s? That seems to be ge
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Edward Arthurs
wrote:
> The difference between IPV4 and IPV6 for someone not familiar is huge,
> 1. There is a totally new format dotted decimal to colon.
> 2. The 32 bit to 128 bit is/or can be quite challenging for some net admins.
these seem like the smallest o
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Justin M. Streiner
wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>>> 2. The network Admins at the above mentioned companies need to learn
>>> IPV6,
>>> most will want there company to pay the bill for this.
>>
>>
>> for a large majority of the use case
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 10:53:20 -0700, "Edward Arthurs" said:
> If mid to small companies have equipment made in the last 7 years, they will
> not need to replace equipment.
> Most net admins at the mid to small companies have no idea about IPV6.
In other words, upgrading or replacing liveware is mo
On Jun 19, 2014, at 12:18 PM, "STARNES, CURTIS"
wrote:
>
> At 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 per /64, that is a lot of address.
> Right now I cannot get IPv6 at home so I will take getting "screwed" with a
> /56 or /60 and be estatic about it.
>
> Curtis
>
>
>
Would be nice if everyone kept i
On 19 June 2014 13:18, STARNES, CURTIS
wrote:
>
> I have to agree with Dan on this one,
> Look at the numbers (especially for small to mid-sized business and
> residential):
>
> /56 = 256 /64's subnets
> /60 = 16 /64's subnets
>
> http://www.sixscape.com/joomla/sixscape/index.php/ipv6-training-ce
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 13:51:06 -0400, Barry Shein said:
> Really. You're really completely discounting ICANN in having any
> leadership or participative role in the IPv4/IPv6 transition?
Haven't seen any yet. Probably because you can't make money with IP addresses
like you can with TLD's
(Now
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Barry Shein wrote:
>
> Really. You're really completely discounting ICANN in having any
> leadership or participative role in the IPv4/IPv6 transition?
>
What leadership position have you seen them take ASIDE from marketing
(in the last 2-3 yrs, but most of that h
On 14-06-19 01:45 PM, William F. Maton Sotomayor wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Sadiq Saif wrote:
>
>> On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
>>> Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment.
>>
>> Any Canadian ISP folk in here want to shine a light on this dearth of
>> residential IPv6 connectivity
Thank You for responding.
If mid to small companies have equipment made in the last 7 years, they will
not need to replace equipment.
Most net admins at the mid to small companies have no idea about IPV6.
Cost is a major consideration at the mid to small size companies, if they need
to upgrade eq
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Christopher Morrow wrote:
2. The network Admins at the above mentioned companies need to learn IPV6,
most will want there company to pay the bill for this.
for a large majority of the use cases it's just "configure that other
family on the interface" and done.
In the sim
On June 19, 2014 at 04:01 o...@delong.com (Owen DeLong) wrote:
> ICANN != a good sampling of number resource issues or concerns.
>
> As you noticed, the whole mess with domain names and their IP issues
> is the monetary tail that wags the ICANN dog. ICANN barely pays attention
> to number re
Those all sounds like legit business questions.
-jim
On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 2:45 PM, William F. Maton Sotomayor <
wma...@ottix.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Sadiq Saif wrote:
>
> On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
>>
>>> Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment.
>>>
>>
>> Any Canadi
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014, Sadiq Saif wrote:
On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment.
Any Canadian ISP folk in here want to shine a light on this dearth of
residential IPv6 connectivity?
Is there any progress being made on this front?
Teksavvy does it (tu
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Brian Hartsfield wrote:
I am going to be real interested to see how the media handles the situation
when ARIN runs out of IPv4 addresses. I could really see some big doom
and gloom stories hit some of the mainstream media when that occurs. While
it isn't the end of the wo
From: Brian Hartsfield
Date: Thursday, June 19, 2014 11:27 AM
To: Lee Howard
Cc: Owen DeLong , Wesley George
, "nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: Re: Ars Technica on IPv4 exhaustion
> For consumers I think I would phrase it more as the "next generation internet"
> and you need IPv6 in order to b
On Thu, 19 Jun 2014 07:18:36 -0500, "STARNES, CURTIS" said:
> At 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 per /64, that is a lot of address.
> Right now I cannot get IPv6 at home so I will take getting "screwed" with a
> /56 or /60 and be estatic about it.
My WNDR3800 running cerowrt is quite able to use up t
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 9:13 PM, Edward Arthurs
wrote:
> There are several obstacles to overcome, IMHO
> 1. The companies at the mid size and smaller levels have to invest in newer
> equipment that handles IPV6.
if they have gear made in the last 7yrs it's likely already got the
right bits for v6
>Short of consumer education, how do you expect to resolve the issue where
>$CONSUMER walks into $BIG_BOX_CE_STORE
>and says "I need a router, what's the cheapest one you have?"
By making the answer "the cheapest is this FooTronics, but you're
better off with this MegaBar. The FooTronics doesn't
For consumers I think I would phrase it more as the "next generation
internet" and you need IPv6 in order to be able to connect to it and that
eventually some sites you want to connect to may not be accessible over the
current internet. Something like that.
I am going to be real interested to see
On 18 June 2014 19:05, Daniel Ankers replied:
>-Original Message-
>From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Ankers
>Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2014 6:37 PM
>To: Owen DeLong; nanog@nanog.org list
>Subject: Re: Credit to Digital Ocean for ipv6 offering
>
>On 18 June 20
There are several obstacles to overcome, IMHO
1. The companies at the mid size and smaller levels have to invest in newer
equipment that handles IPV6.
2. The network Admins at the above mentioned companies need to learn IPV6,
most will want there company to pay the bill for this.
3. The vendors tha
On 6/18/2014 14:25, Lee Howard wrote:
> Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment.
Any Canadian ISP folk in here want to shine a light on this dearth of
residential IPv6 connectivity?
Is there any progress being made on this front?
--
Sadiq Saif
Doesn't surprise me at all. Another thing I've seen lately is number of
software (especially system management software) after being certified/tested
with IPv6 no longer function when IPv6 is enabled. At least one vendor that
broke IPv6 with a recent patch told me they only tested it once for IP
On 6/18/14 7:26 PM, "Karl Auer" wrote:
>On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 19:02 -0400, George, Wes wrote:
>> Similarly, Belkin¹s home routers appear to support IPv6, but that
>>doesn¹t
>> appear in the specs or features list on their site when I just checked
>>it.
>
>There's also an issue of what "IPv6 sup
>
>
>
>> I support a recommendation to consumer retailers to start requiring IPv6
>> support in the stuff that they sell, but unfortunately I don¹t have very
>> good data on how large of a request that actually is.
>
>In my experience, retailers will sell whatever flies off the shelves
>without
>re
On 6/17/14 11:43 PM, "Frank Bulk" wrote:
>These sites used to be dual-stacked:
>www.cablelabs.com (over 180 days ago via ipv6.cablelabs.com)
>www.att.net (over 44 days ago)
>www.charter.com (over 151 days)
>www.globalcrossing.com (over 802 days)
>www.timewarnercable.com (over 593 days)
Check t
On Jun 18, 2014, at 4:02 PM, George, Wes wrote:
>
> On 6/18/14, 4:09 PM, "Owen DeLong" wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Now, consider DVRs, BluRay players, Receiver/Amplifiers, Televisions,
>>> etc. where there are, currently, no IPv6 capable choices available to
>>> the best of my knowledge.
>
> I think t
ICANN != a good sampling of number resource issues or concerns.
As you noticed, the whole mess with domain names and their IP issues
is the monetary tail that wags the ICANN dog. ICANN barely pays attention
to number resources and when they do, it’s primarily to do whatever has
been agreed upon by
On Jun 18, 2014, at 4:37 PM, Daniel Ankers wrote:
> On 18 June 2014 19:05, Owen DeLong wrote:
> OTOH, it's far better than those ridiculous providers that are screwing over
> their customers with /56s or even worse, /60s.
>
> Sad, really.
>
> Owen
>
>
> Is giving a /56 to residential custo
67 matches
Mail list logo
