From david.kessens at nokia.com Thu Sep 2 03:14:22 2004 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 18:14:22 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Call for agenda items RIPE49 & draft agenda (v1) Message-ID: <20040902011422.GE28532@nokia.com> Please see below for the first version of the draft agenda. As usual, we don't have enough interesting topics (yet). That is bad news and good news: I need your help in finding interesting topics but the good news is that we will have time to accommodate your suggestions. Let me know if you want to volunteer for an agenda topic, but also feel free to suggest a topic that I or the list might know volunteers for. Thanks, David Kessens --- Updated agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE49 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday September 22, 2004 Where: Medici Room, Renaissance Hotel, Manchester, UK A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) D. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? o TeliaSonera (Mikael Lind) E. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) F. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB --- From iljitsch at muada.com Fri Sep 3 01:01:59 2004 From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum) Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 01:01:59 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Call for agenda items RIPE49 & draft agenda (v1) In-Reply-To: <20040902011422.GE28532@nokia.com> References: <20040902011422.GE28532@nokia.com> Message-ID: <182087FC-FD34-11D8-A858-000A95CD987A@muada.com> On 2-sep-04, at 3:14, David Kessens wrote: > Please see below for the first version of the draft agenda. As usual, > we don't have enough interesting topics (yet). That is bad news and > good news: I need your help in finding interesting topics but the good > news is that we will have time to accommodate your suggestions. Let me > know if you want to volunteer for an agenda topic, but also feel free > to suggest a topic that I or the list might know volunteers for. A topic that's near and dear to my heart is how an IPv6 host finds IPv6 addresses for resolving nameservers. The IETF doesn't seem to be able to reach consensus on doing this by having well known addresses, by advertising the addresses in the DNS or by doing this using some form of DHCP. And having more than one solution is also blocked. So what do we, as people who actually run IPv6, feel about this, and what can we do other than editing resolv.conf by hand every time we move to another IPv6 network? I'd be happy to summerize the issue (but be warned that I'm biased) but the real value in having this as an agenda item would be a discussion. I'll also be happy to talk about by IPv6 counter ( http://countipv6.bgpexpert.com/ ) but there isn't THAT much to tell. :-) From cfriacas at fccn.pt Fri Sep 3 19:51:15 2004 From: cfriacas at fccn.pt (Carlos Friacas) Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2004 18:51:15 +0100 (WEST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Portuguese Mirror also in IPv6 (fwd) Message-ID: Hello, Just to report yet another very small step... (the 3rd ripe meetings' webcast mirror, acessible via IPv6 - following Cesnet's and Surfnet's) Regards, ./Carlos -------------- http://www.ip6.fccn.pt/nativeRCTS2.html Wide Area Network (WAN) Workgroup, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional http://www.fccn.pt "Internet is just routes (140068/465), naming (millions) and... people!" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 3 Sep 2004 14:33:31 +0100 From: Nuno Gon?alves To: ripecast at ripe.net Cc: 'Carlos Friacas' , Subject: Portuguese Mirror also in IPv6 Hello! My name is Nuno Gon?alves and I work at FCCN on the streaming area. I saw on your website at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-49/webcast.html , that there is an URL to our mirror here at Lisbon among the other mirrors across Europe! Our mirror already has IPv6 enabled, so is it possible to add the IPv6 next to ?Portugal Mirror:? on the web page? Thanks in advance Best Regards Nuno Gon?alves _____________________ Nuno Gon?alves - FCCN Work Group Multimedia nuno at fccn.pt http://www.fccn.pt _____________________ From billy.glynn at domainregistry.ie Mon Sep 6 19:05:11 2004 From: billy.glynn at domainregistry.ie (Billy Glynn) Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 18:05:11 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie Message-ID: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> Hi, FYI, the IEDR in it's capacity as ccTLD manager of .ie have added a new IPv6 compatible name server ns6.iedr.ie. Additionally, we have added AAAA glue for one of our slaves ns3.ns.esat.net. ns3.ns.esat.net also slaves for the folks at .tp Kind regards -- ________________________________ Billy Glynn Network Operations Centre IE Domain Registry Ltd Tel: +353 (0)1 2365404 Mobile: +353 (0)87 9188317 billy.glynn at domainregistry.ie ________________________________ From dr at cluenet.de Tue Sep 7 01:08:35 2004 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 01:08:35 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 Message-ID: <20040906230835.GA692@srv01.cluenet.de> DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones ==================================================== Issue 2004-09-07 Zones analyzed and their SOA contacts: - . - arpa. nstld at verisign-grs.com - int. noc at icann.org - in-addr.arpa bind at arin.net - ip6.arpa. hostmaster at icann.org - ip6.int. hostmaster at ep.net Operators: please let me know wether you do want a copy when there's no problem with your zone(s) or not. Don't want to annoy anyone unnecessarily! Some people have approached me wether it would be possible to receive personal copies of the report. Please let me know wether you are interested in such a service yourself. If there is enough interest, I will set up a distro list for that. Executive summary: * the IP6.ARPA problems regarding delegation NS RRset got fixed! * ns.isi.edu is _still_ out of sync for the INT zone. * ns.isi.edu is _still_ auth for IP6.INT where it shouldn't be. The state of the root zone =========================== fine! The state of the ARPA zone ========================== fine! The state of the INT zone ========================= - ns.isi.edu is not in sync with the other nameservers Current SOA serial of the INT TLD: 2004090400, ns.isi.edu has still 2002080104 and is publishing stale data (e.g. an old NS RRset for the zone). Problem exists since at least 2004-08-24 The state of the IN-ADDR.ARPA zone ================================== fine! The state of the IP6.ARPA zone ============================== fine! The state of the IP6.INT zone ============================= - ns.isi.edu (one of the INT TLD servers) feels authoritative for the IP6.INT zone, but is neither listed in the delegation NS RRset, nor in the in-zone NS RRset of IP6.INT. Luckily, ns.isi.edu carries ip6.int with the same SOA serial as the official servers, so induces no operational problems so far. Problem exists since at least 2004-08-24 Regards, Daniel From jeroen at unfix.org Tue Sep 7 08:39:08 2004 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 08:39:08 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> Message-ID: <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 19:05, Billy Glynn wrote: > Hi, > > FYI, the IEDR in it's capacity as ccTLD manager of .ie have added a new > IPv6 compatible name server ns6.iedr.ie. > Additionally, we have added AAAA glue for one of our slaves > ns3.ns.esat.net. ns3.ns.esat.net also slaves for the folks at .tp Neat, 2 IPv6 nameservers in the root for .ie. I also see that you have ns2.nic.fr listed in there, ns3.nic.fr has IPv6 for sure. You should maybe ask RIPE NCC if they can stick glue for ns.ripe.net into the . also with an IPv6 address, which would also give quite a number of other TLD's etc an IPv6 capable nameserver all of a sudden. RIPE NCC folks ? :) Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Mohsen.Souissi at nic.fr Tue Sep 7 09:06:59 2004 From: Mohsen.Souissi at nic.fr (Mohsen Souissi) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 09:06:59 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20040907070659.GY7139@kerkenna.nic.fr> Hi, On 07 Sep, Jeroen Massar wrote: | On Mon, 2004-09-06 at 19:05, Billy Glynn wrote: | > Hi, | > | > FYI, the IEDR in it's capacity as ccTLD manager of .ie have added a new | > IPv6 compatible name server ns6.iedr.ie. | > Additionally, we have added AAAA glue for one of our slaves | > ns3.ns.esat.net. ns3.ns.esat.net also slaves for the folks at .tp | | Neat, 2 IPv6 nameservers in the root for .ie. | | I also see that you have ns2.nic.fr listed in there, ns3.nic.fr has IPv6 | for sure. ==> ns2.nic.fr has been supporting IPv6 for several months. We published it's IPv6 address a couple of weeks ago and we intend to ask for sticking its AAAA in . soon. By the way, we will use 'b.nic.fr' instead of 'ns2.nic.fr' as we used 'c.nic.fr' instead of 'ns3.nic.fr' for fr AAAA glue under . Mohsen. | | You should maybe ask RIPE NCC if they can stick glue for ns.ripe.net | into the . also with an IPv6 address, which would also give quite a | number of other TLD's etc an IPv6 capable nameserver all of a sudden. | | RIPE NCC folks ? :) | | Greets, | Jeroen From cfriacas at fccn.pt Tue Sep 7 09:54:30 2004 From: cfriacas at fccn.pt (Carlos Friacas) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:54:30 +0100 (WEST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie (fwd) Message-ID: FYI, 19 TLDs already served by IPv6 nameservers w/glue-record on ".". Tue Sep 7 08:50:45 WEST 2004 ----------------------------- CH. DOMREG.NIC.CH. LI. DOMREG.NIC.CH. DE. A.NIC.DE. FR. C.NIC.FR. IE. NS6.IEDR.IE. JP. A.DNS.JP. JP. D.DNS.JP. JP. E.DNS.JP. JP. F.DNS.JP. KR. G.DNS.KR. IE. NS3.NS.ESAT.NET. TP. NS3.NS.ESAT.NET. AN. NS0.JA.NET. GB. NS0.JA.NET. GG. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS0.JA.NET. JE. NS0.JA.NET. AN. NS0.JA.NET. GB. NS0.JA.NET. GG. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS0.JA.NET. JE. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS-SEC.RIPE.NET. AQ. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. IL. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. NL. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. PH. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. TN. NS.ATI.TN. TW. A.DNS.TW. TW. C.DNS.TW. TW. D.DNS.TW. ./Carlos -------------- http://www.ip6.fccn.pt/nativeRCTS2.html Wide Area Network (WAN) Workgroup, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional http://www.fccn.pt "Internet is just routes (140068/465), naming (millions) and... people!" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 18:05:11 +0100 From: Billy Glynn To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net Cc: dns-wg at ripe.net, tech at lists.centr.org, ga at centr.org Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie Hi, FYI, the IEDR in it's capacity as ccTLD manager of .ie have added a new IPv6 compatible name server ns6.iedr.ie. Additionally, we have added AAAA glue for one of our slaves ns3.ns.esat.net. ns3.ns.esat.net also slaves for the folks at .tp Kind regards -- ________________________________ Billy Glynn Network Operations Centre IE Domain Registry Ltd Tel: +353 (0)1 2365404 Mobile: +353 (0)87 9188317 billy.glynn at domainregistry.ie ________________________________ From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Tue Sep 7 11:40:41 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:40:41 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> Message-ID: <20040907094041.GA3639@reifa.local> On 07.09 08:49, Andreas S. Kerber wrote: > > uuh, I guess that would get pretty close to 512 bytes when querying ie. So what? See below for examples of what could happen: soem glue is omitted. If the client supports IPv6 it almost certainly supports EDNS(0), so the 512 byte limit is no issue. If the lient does not support EDNS some glue may be dropped for very long names without problems. See http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/publications/v6rootglue.pdf for a little more detail. (It can be argued that dropping AAAA glue first is a good tactic here because "see above". This will be implemented on all root name servers in the near future.) Daniel ----- ; <<>> DiG 8.2 <<>> @k.root-servers.net. short.ie. ; (1 server found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 10, ADDITIONAL: 12 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; short.ie, type = A, class = IN ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: ie. 2D IN NS ns2.nic.fr. ie. 2D IN NS ns.ripe.net. ie. 2D IN NS banba.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS ns3.ns.esat.net. ie. 2D IN NS gns1.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS gns2.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ice.netsource.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ns6.iedr.ie. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns2.nic.fr. 2D IN A 192.93.0.4 ns.ripe.net. 2D IN A 193.0.0.193 banba.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 193.1.142.2 uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.18 uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.19 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN A 192.111.39.100 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN AAAA 2001:7c8:2:a::64 gns1.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.102 gns2.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.103 ice.netsource.ie. 2D IN A 212.17.32.2 ns6.iedr.ie. 2D IN A 213.190.149.221 ns6.iedr.ie. 2D IN AAAA 2001:bb0:ccc3::2 ;; Total query time: 71 msec ;; FROM: dienst.karrenberg.net to SERVER: k.root-servers.net. 193.0.14.129 ;; WHEN: Tue Sep 7 11:29:37 2004 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 26 rcvd: 499 ; <<>> DiG 8.2 <<>> @k.root-servers.net. something.verylogindeed.fordemopurposes.ie ; (1 server found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 10, ADDITIONAL: 11 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; something.verylogindeed.fordemopurposes.ie, type = A, class = IN ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: ie. 2D IN NS ns2.nic.fr. ie. 2D IN NS ns.ripe.net. ie. 2D IN NS banba.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS ns3.ns.esat.net. ie. 2D IN NS gns1.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS gns2.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ice.netsource.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ns6.iedr.ie. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns2.nic.fr. 2D IN A 192.93.0.4 ns.ripe.net. 2D IN A 193.0.0.193 banba.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 193.1.142.2 uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.18 uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.19 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN A 192.111.39.100 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN AAAA 2001:7c8:2:a::64 gns1.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.102 gns2.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.103 ice.netsource.ie. 2D IN A 212.17.32.2 ns6.iedr.ie. 2D IN A 213.190.149.221 ;; Total query time: 69 msec ;; FROM: dienst.karrenberg.net to SERVER: k.root-servers.net. 193.0.14.129 ;; WHEN: Tue Sep 7 11:29:43 2004 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 60 rcvd: 505 ; <<>> DiG 8.2 <<>> @k.root-servers.net. something.verylogindeed.fordemopurposes.evenlonger.toforceommittingmoreglue.ie ; (1 server found) ;; res options: init recurs defnam dnsrch ;; got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 6 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 10, ADDITIONAL: 9 ;; QUERY SECTION: ;; something.verylogindeed.fordemopurposes.evenlonger.toforceommittingmoreglue.ie, type = A, class = IN ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: ie. 2D IN NS ns2.nic.fr. ie. 2D IN NS ns.ripe.net. ie. 2D IN NS banba.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. ie. 2D IN NS ns3.ns.esat.net. ie. 2D IN NS gns1.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS gns2.domainregistry.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ice.netsource.ie. ie. 2D IN NS ns6.iedr.ie. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: ns2.nic.fr. 2D IN A 192.93.0.4 ns.ripe.net. 2D IN A 193.0.0.193 banba.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 193.1.142.2 uucp-gw-1.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.18 uucp-gw-2.pa.dec.com. 2D IN A 204.123.2.19 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN A 192.111.39.100 ns3.ns.esat.net. 2D IN AAAA 2001:7c8:2:a::64 gns1.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.102 gns2.domainregistry.ie. 2D IN A 198.133.199.103 ;; Total query time: 67 msec ;; FROM: dienst.karrenberg.net to SERVER: k.root-servers.net. 193.0.14.129 ;; WHEN: Tue Sep 7 11:33:53 2004 ;; MSG SIZE sent: 96 rcvd: 509 From iljitsch at muada.com Tue Sep 7 11:46:02 2004 From: iljitsch at muada.com (Iljitsch van Beijnum) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:46:02 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <20040907094041.GA3639@reifa.local> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> <20040907094041.GA3639@reifa.local> Message-ID: On 7-sep-04, at 11:40, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > If the lient does not support EDNS some glue may be dropped for > very long names without problems. > See http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/publications/v6rootglue.pdf for > a little more detail. > (It can be argued that dropping AAAA glue first > is a good tactic here because "see above". This will be implemented > on all root name servers in the near future.) So then nothing stands in the way of adding AAAA glue records to the root? From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Tue Sep 7 11:56:17 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 11:56:17 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> <20040907094041.GA3639@reifa.local> Message-ID: <20040907095617.GC3639@reifa.local> On 07.09 11:46, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > > So then nothing stands in the way of adding AAAA glue records to the > root? Nothing other than the fact that the root is considered special by many and our collective processes are careful with changes to it. Some of this actually has rechnical rationale. I'll just name two examples: 1) The root servers are already the most loaded servers for any zone. 2) There are concerns that buggy resolvers may behave badly and aggrevate 1) above. So some more testing will have to be done and then the collective processes will have to run their course..... . Daniel From dr at cluenet.de Tue Sep 7 12:01:02 2004 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 12:01:02 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <20040906230835.GA692@srv01.cluenet.de> References: <20040906230835.GA692@srv01.cluenet.de> Message-ID: <20040907100102.GA16775@srv01.cluenet.de> On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 01:08:35AM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote: > DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones Upon request of RIPE NCC, I will cease posting this here. Regards, Daniel From jordi.palet at consulintel.es Tue Sep 7 14:33:49 2004 From: jordi.palet at consulintel.es (JORDI PALET MARTINEZ) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 14:33:49 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IEEE SAINT2005 workshop CPF: IPv6 Deployment Status and Challenges Message-ID: <017201c494d6$ed71b1e0$8700000a@consulintel.es> Hi all, The call for papers for this international workshop is now open until October 7. Authors are kindly requested to submit papers as early as possible to facilitate a review process. IEEE SAINT2005 workshop CPF: IPv6 Deployment Status and Challenges http://www.ist-ipv6.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=659 Please forward this email to all your contacts. Regards, Jordi ********************************** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line at: http://www.ipv6-es.com This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. From tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk Tue Sep 7 16:53:27 2004 From: tjc at ecs.soton.ac.uk (Tim Chown) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 15:53:27 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 Deployment Conference at RIPE 49 Message-ID: <20040907145327.GA27237@login.ecs.soton.ac.uk> Hi, The UK IPv6 Task Force, in conjunction with RIPE and the European IST IPv6 Cluster, is presenting a programme of IPv6 events from 23rd-24th September 2004. The UK IPv6 Deployment Conference, sponsored by BT and Cisco, is targeted at those interested in the current state of play in IPv6 deployment. It aims to present an overview of state-of-the-art in the latest IPv6 deployment technology, including: * Advanced testbeds, including the US Moonv6 project * Early IPv6 production deployments, in backbones and enterprises * IPv4-IPv6 transition and integration technologies * IPv6 opportunities: new technologies, delivery media and applications The Conference is co-located with the 49th RIPE Meeting of 20th-24th September, at which Europe's ISPs will gather to discuss technology and policy. We have scheduled a free European IST IPv6 Cluster meeting on the afternoon before the UK IPv6 Deployment Conference to allow our delegates the opportunity of attending an attractive, fuller one-and-a-half day programme of leading edge IPv6 talks and discussion should they wish to do so. For full details and registration information, please see: http://www.uk.ipv6tf.org/events/manchester.html Hope to see you in Manchester! Regards, Tim Chown UK IPv6 Task Force Steering Committee From andrei at ripe.net Wed Sep 8 09:57:52 2004 From: andrei at ripe.net (Andrei Robachevsky) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:57:52 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> Message-ID: <413EBB80.10900@ripe.net> Andreas S. Kerber wrote: > On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 08:39:08AM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >>I also see that you have ns2.nic.fr listed in there, ns3.nic.fr has IPv6 >>for sure. >>You should maybe ask RIPE NCC if they can stick glue for ns.ripe.net >>into the . also with an IPv6 address, which would also give quite a >>number of other TLD's etc an IPv6 capable nameserver all of a sudden. > > > uuh, I guess that would get pretty close to 512 bytes when querying ie. > > # dig -t NS ie. @a.root-servers.net | grep MSG > ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 493 I think adding another AAAA record will actually exceed this limit. Daniel wrote: > So what? See below for examples of what could happen: > soem glue is omitted. > But also the IANA procedure will not permit it: "5. If the number of name servers or IP addresses in the delegation exceeds eight (8), the size of responses to reasonable queries with the intended delegation will be checked to ensure that such responses fit into a 512 byte UDP packet. This is the standard size limitation for UDP response packets for most resolving name server software on the Internet today." Coming back to the issue with ns.ripe.net. The fact that it is a secondary for about 90 ccTLDs makes it impossible to insert AAAA record in the root for any of the zone, because that will affect others. Currently, we are planning to introduce a scheme whereby each ccTLD has its own name in the ripe.net domain, eg: ns-ie.ripe.net A 193.0.12.107 AAAA 2001:610:240:0:53:cc:12:107 All of the addresses for ccTLDs (ns-XX.ripe.net) are simply IP aliases on a shared machine. Regards, Andrei Robachevsky RIPE NCC From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Wed Sep 8 10:19:43 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:19:43 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <413EBB80.10900@ripe.net> References: <413C98C7.2030501@domainregistry.ie> <1094539148.2721.124.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040907064929.GA24832@osiris.speedkom.net> <413EBB80.10900@ripe.net> Message-ID: <20040908081943.GA490@reifa.karrenberg.net> On 08.09 09:57, Andrei Robachevsky wrote: > But also the IANA procedure will not permit it: > > "5. If the number of name servers or IP addresses in the delegation > exceeds eight (8), the size of responses to reasonable queries with the > intended delegation will be checked to ensure that such responses fit > into a 512 byte UDP packet. This is the standard size limitation for UDP > response packets for most resolving name server software on the Internet > today." That is correct. It depends what a reasonable query is. If I was IANA I would advise .ie strongly to rationalise the names in their glue to save space. However, my point is that exceeding this limit will not cause the sky to fall down. Daniel From Mohsen.Souissi at nic.fr Wed Sep 8 10:58:28 2004 From: Mohsen.Souissi at nic.fr (Mohsen Souissi) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:58:28 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> References: <20040908081943.GA490@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> Message-ID: <20040908085828.GA68625@kerkenna.nic.fr> On 08 Sep, Jim Reid wrote: | >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Karrenberg writes: | | Daniel> If I was IANA I would advise .ie strongly to rationalise | Daniel> the names in their glue to save space. | | Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: using | efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. ==> In order not to reinvent the wheel, I believe, this humble contribution might be a good start for whom wants to write such a draft. http://w6.nic.fr/dnsv6/resp-size.html#compress-tld-ans Mohsen. From cfriacas at fccn.pt Wed Sep 8 12:23:19 2004 From: cfriacas at fccn.pt (Carlos Friacas) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:23:19 +0100 (WEST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie (fwd) Message-ID: One more today... Belgium (.BE), supported by BRUSSELS.NS.DNS.BE. (2001:6a8:3c60::be) ./Carlos -------------- http://www.ip6.fccn.pt/nativeRCTS2.html Wide Area Network (WAN) Workgroup, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional http://www.fccn.pt "Internet is just routes (140068/465), naming (millions) and... people!" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 08:54:30 +0100 (WEST) From: Carlos Friacas To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie (fwd) FYI, 19 TLDs already served by IPv6 nameservers w/glue-record on ".". Tue Sep 7 08:50:45 WEST 2004 ----------------------------- CH. DOMREG.NIC.CH. LI. DOMREG.NIC.CH. DE. A.NIC.DE. FR. C.NIC.FR. IE. NS6.IEDR.IE. JP. A.DNS.JP. JP. D.DNS.JP. JP. E.DNS.JP. JP. F.DNS.JP. KR. G.DNS.KR. IE. NS3.NS.ESAT.NET. TP. NS3.NS.ESAT.NET. AN. NS0.JA.NET. GB. NS0.JA.NET. GG. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS0.JA.NET. JE. NS0.JA.NET. AN. NS0.JA.NET. GB. NS0.JA.NET. GG. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS0.JA.NET. JE. NS0.JA.NET. INT. NS-SEC.RIPE.NET. AQ. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. IL. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. NL. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. PH. NS-EXT.ISC.ORG. TN. NS.ATI.TN. TW. A.DNS.TW. TW. C.DNS.TW. TW. D.DNS.TW. ./Carlos -------------- http://www.ip6.fccn.pt/nativeRCTS2.html Wide Area Network (WAN) Workgroup, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN FCCN - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional http://www.fccn.pt "Internet is just routes (140068/465), naming (millions) and... people!" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 18:05:11 +0100 From: Billy Glynn To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net Cc: dns-wg at ripe.net, tech at lists.centr.org, ga at centr.org Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 in .ie Hi, FYI, the IEDR in it's capacity as ccTLD manager of .ie have added a new IPv6 compatible name server ns6.iedr.ie. Additionally, we have added AAAA glue for one of our slaves ns3.ns.esat.net. ns3.ns.esat.net also slaves for the folks at .tp Kind regards -- ________________________________ Billy Glynn Network Operations Centre IE Domain Registry Ltd Tel: +353 (0)1 2365404 Mobile: +353 (0)87 9188317 billy.glynn at domainregistry.ie ________________________________ From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Wed Sep 8 17:07:22 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 17:07:22 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 Message-ID: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> Since a storm seems to be rising about this and it threatens to leave the tea cup here is some perspective. Daniel ----- Forwarded message from Daniel Karrenberg ----- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 08:21:23 +0200 From: Daniel Karrenberg To: Daniel Roesen Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 On 08.09 00:00, Daniel Roesen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > On 07.09 01:08, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > > DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones > > > ==================================================== > > > > Please stop spamming mailing lists. > > OK, you made me curious. Why do you (you are the first, all the other > feedback was overly positive) consider this "spamming"? Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists is considered bad netiquette. In your case even more so since similar and better defined reports are available on demand from more than one source. It would have been more acceptable to say something like: "Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." These days netiquette is violated so frequently that most people do not even care to point things out to violators; they just ignore messages from people who do not behave socially. Procmail is an easy tool. [I spent 6 minutes composing this message. Multiply by n>20 / day] > And: was your request as a representant of the RIPE NCC, or as a > private person? Take it as advice from me as a person. The RIPE NCC does not police RIPE mailing lists. Daniel ----- End forwarded message ----- From jeroen at unfix.org Wed Sep 8 18:09:10 2004 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 18:09:10 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> Message-ID: <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 17:07, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > Since a storm seems to be rising about this > and it threatens to leave the tea cup here > is some perspective. Which book is that from? > On 08.09 00:00, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > > On 07.09 01:08, Daniel Roesen wrote: > > > > DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones > > > > ==================================================== > > > > > > Please stop spamming mailing lists. > > > > OK, you made me curious. Why do you (you are the first, all the other > > feedback was overly positive) consider this "spamming"? > > Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists > is considered bad netiquette. I really can't call it spam, there was nothing unsolicited inside it, they where not autogenerated, did not contain any off-topic contents and it did not advertise for anything. > In your case even more so since > similar and better defined reports are available on demand from > more than one source. Which sources may that be that report about nameservers? (There is unfortunatly no IPv6-wg resource page and google can't seem to find them for me either) Next to that, it is quite apparent that the operator(s) in question are not really watching their own infrastructure, which is basically their work, at all.... that gives one to wonder... > It would have been more acceptable to say something like: > "Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? > If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." Indeed, where can I request to signup for this as I think it is very useful, even more useful than the CIDR report, which doesn't change as the people at the top are simply ignoring it anyways. Nameservers though are technically important, if they are configured wrongly then they don't work and they break stuff and especially at the level what was being reported about I think it is a very important technical report. > These days netiquette is violated so frequently that most people > do not even care to point things out to violators; > they just ignore messages from people who do not behave socially. > Procmail is an easy tool. Indeed, that is the way most people do it and they do it silently without making it publicly noticeable that they have something, whatever that may be 'against' some person/company or his/her/it's beliefs. That is why I always use one single mail address for posting my own personal beliefs, if you want to add it to the killfile have fun doing so, responses coming back from persons who don't like you won't be productive in any way thus it only saves a lot of useless mails. Greets, Jeroen (Only took me <1 min to type this ;) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Thu Sep 9 09:11:20 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 09:11:20 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20040909071120.GB490@reifa.karrenberg.net> On 08.09 18:09, Jeroen Massar wrote: > On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 17:07, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > Since a storm seems to be rising about this > > and it threatens to leave the tea cup here > > is some perspective. > > Which book is that from? My own ;-). > I really can't call it spam ... A matter of definition. Maybe I was a bit harsh using the word spam. My feeble excuse for being harsher than usual is that I returned from holidays recently found my daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net mailbox had grown about 3000 messages **each day**. Also the spam-filtering of the NCC was not only letting about 10% of it through but was also starting to generate false positives. This SPAM filtering is maintained by competent professionals, and *still* I have to resort to personal whitelisting now and spend significant amout of time to weed out messages which I do not want. Daniel sent these messages to multiple mailing lists and he did not take the hint when his messages were not re-distributed to nanog; instead he sent them twice with different message-ids, causing the messages to land in my mailbox twice. So I decided to give him another hint, he took it as an official request, and the storm-in-a-teacup started. > ... > Which sources may that be that report about nameservers? > (There is unfortunatly no IPv6-wg resource page and google can't > seem to find them for me either) google(dns delegation check) does it for me. The fourth hit is for http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/dns/r45-minutes.html Check out agenda point F. There are tools available with well defined and discussed methodologies. > Next to that, it is quite apparent that the operator(s) in question > are not really watching their own infrastructure, which is basically > their work, at all.... that gives one to wonder... I agree. But why do regular messages about this belong into the mailbox of all subscribers of all the lists Daniel posts to? > > It would have been more acceptable to say something like: > > "Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? > > If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." > > Indeed, where can I request to signup for this as I think it is very > useful .... Daniel? Daniel From jim at rfc1035.com Wed Sep 8 10:54:02 2004 From: jim at rfc1035.com (Jim Reid) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:54:02 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: Message from Daniel Karrenberg of "Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:19:43 +0200." <20040908081943.GA490@reifa.karrenberg.net> Message-ID: <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Karrenberg writes: Daniel> If I was IANA I would advise .ie strongly to rationalise Daniel> the names in their glue to save space. Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: using efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. From brad at stop.mail-abuse.org Wed Sep 8 11:21:10 2004 From: brad at stop.mail-abuse.org (Brad Knowles) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 11:21:10 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> References: <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> Message-ID: At 9:54 AM +0100 2004-09-08, Jim Reid wrote: > Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: using > efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. That's a good idea. Should this be a RIPE BCP, or under IETF? I'll be glad to contribute some of my own personal experiences, if anyone wants to write such a beast. I'd be very interested to see how much supporting evidence could be gathered to explain why this is an important topic. -- Brad Knowles, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755 SAGE member since 1995. See for more info. From bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com Wed Sep 8 18:08:33 2004 From: bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com (bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2004 16:08:33 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> References: <20040908081943.GA490@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1136.1094633642@gromit.rfc1035.com> Message-ID: <20040908160833.GB16434@vacation.karoshi.com.> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 09:54:02AM +0100, Jim Reid wrote: > >>>>> "Daniel" == Daniel Karrenberg writes: > > Daniel> If I was IANA I would advise .ie strongly to rationalise > Daniel> the names in their glue to save space. > > Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: using > efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. you mean the resp-size draft that is already out there is not good enough? --bill From jim at rfc1035.com Wed Sep 8 18:38:20 2004 From: jim at rfc1035.com (Jim Reid) Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 17:38:20 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: Message from bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com of "Wed, 08 Sep 2004 16:08:33 -0000." <20040908160833.GB16434@vacation.karoshi.com.> Message-ID: <2284.1094661500@gromit.rfc1035.com> >>>>> "Bill" == bmanning writes: Daniel> the names in their glue to save space. >> Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: >> using efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. Bill> you mean the resp-size draft that is already out there Bill> is not good enough? I thought that had died..... From jarno.lahteenmaki at finnet.fi Thu Sep 9 08:13:58 2004 From: jarno.lahteenmaki at finnet.fi (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jarno_L=E4hteenm=E4ki?=) Date: Thu, 09 Sep 2004 09:13:58 +0300 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <413FF4A6.9080707@finnet.fi> I'm not considering the report as a spam but... The report would be more usefull if you send a summary on a monthly basis. Sending the report daily or even weekly is way too often... If needed you can provide daily snapshots somewhere else (a web page perhaps?). --> Jarno L?hteenm?ki Jeroen Massar wrote: > On Wed, 2004-09-08 at 17:07, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > >>Since a storm seems to be rising about this >>and it threatens to leave the tea cup here >>is some perspective. > > > Which book is that from? > > > >>On 08.09 00:00, Daniel Roesen wrote: >> >>>On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 11:49:48AM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: >>> >>>>On 07.09 01:08, Daniel Roesen wrote: >>>> >>>>>DNS WEATHER REPORT for selected infrastructure zones >>>>>==================================================== >>>> >>>>Please stop spamming mailing lists. >>> >>>OK, you made me curious. Why do you (you are the first, all the other >>>feedback was overly positive) consider this "spamming"? >> >>Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists >>is considered bad netiquette. > > > I really can't call it spam, there was nothing unsolicited inside it, > they where not autogenerated, did not contain any off-topic contents and > it did not advertise for anything. > > >>In your case even more so since >>similar and better defined reports are available on demand from >>more than one source. > > > Which sources may that be that report about nameservers? > (There is unfortunatly no IPv6-wg resource page and google can't > seem to find them for me either) > > Next to that, it is quite apparent that the operator(s) in question > are not really watching their own infrastructure, which is basically > their work, at all.... that gives one to wonder... > > >>It would have been more acceptable to say something like: >>"Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? >>If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." > > > Indeed, where can I request to signup for this as I think it is very > useful, even more useful than the CIDR report, which doesn't change as > the people at the top are simply ignoring it anyways. Nameservers though > are technically important, if they are configured wrongly then they > don't work and they break stuff and especially at the level what was > being reported about I think it is a very important technical report. > > >>These days netiquette is violated so frequently that most people >>do not even care to point things out to violators; >>they just ignore messages from people who do not behave socially. >>Procmail is an easy tool. > > > Indeed, that is the way most people do it and they do it silently > without making it publicly noticeable that they have something, > whatever that may be 'against' some person/company or his/her/it's > beliefs. That is why I always use one single mail address for posting > my own personal beliefs, if you want to add it to the killfile have fun > doing so, responses coming back from persons who don't like you won't > be productive in any way thus it only saves a lot of useless mails. > > Greets, > Jeroen > > (Only took me <1 min to type this ;) > From olaf at ripe.net Thu Sep 9 15:15:04 2004 From: olaf at ripe.net (Olaf M. Kolkman) Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2004 15:15:04 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: [dns-wg] IPv6 in .ie In-Reply-To: <2284.1094661500@gromit.rfc1035.com> References: <20040908160833.GB16434@vacation.karoshi.com.> <2284.1094661500@gromit.rfc1035.com> Message-ID: <20040909151504.2e7b67db.olaf@ripe.net> On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 17:38:20 +0100 Jim Reid wrote: > >>>>> "Bill" == bmanning writes: > > Daniel> the names in their glue to save space. > >> Yeah. Somebody needs to write up a draft on this as a BCP: > >> using efficient label compression to avoid truncated responses. > > Bill> you mean the resp-size draft that is already out there > Bill> is not good enough? > I thought that had died..... For your information and reference: resp-size is at: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-dnsop-respsize-01.txt A common parent name is recommended in the resp-size draft: 4.1. The current practice of giving all nameserver names a common parent (such as GTLD-SERVERS.NET or ROOT-SERVERS.NET) saves space in DNS responses and allows for more nameservers to be enumerated than would otherwise be possible. (Note that in this case it is wise to serve the common parent domain's zone from the same servers that are named within it, in order to limit external dependencies when all your eggs are in a single basket.) The document is not dead, it came up in the DNSOP meeting at IETF60 in San Diego. http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/dnsop/msg03041.html Rob Austein: Paul, want to say anything about respsize doc? Paul Vixie: I know that one person actually read this and found clownish commentary I put in draft. Nobody flamed me. There is a very controversial comment in this draft. Peter Koch: Have one question or remark. We had funny discussion about what is allowed length for domain name. 255, 256, 253. It'. a bit late now to discuss this because this is very basic DNS stuff. Nothing to do with your draft, but obviously some basic questions yet unresolved. Anything we can do in this or another WG to resolve this? (Peters question sidetracked the discussion somewhat ... I skip that here... ) Paul Vixie: In terms of process, I do not think this draft is ready to progress, because no-one complained. So until I have some feeling that someone other than me has seen this text, I will say it's not ready to go forward. Rob Austein: So given that we had a number of people claiming this was important work, suggests that there is some work to be done in terms of reading doc that hasn't happened yet. You're all slackers. Go read the document! -- ---------------------------------| Olaf M. Kolkman ---------------------------------| RIPE NCC From david.kessens at nokia.com Sat Sep 11 03:34:57 2004 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:34:57 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Draft (v1) IPv6 wg minutes at RIPE 47 Message-ID: <20040911013457.GB7585@nokia.com> Please see below for the draft minutes of RIPE 47. My apologies for the late publication. The minutes will be approved if no significant comments will be received before the next working roup session in Manchester. David Kessens --- ________________________________________________ Draft (v1) minutes for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE 47 When: 14:00 - 15:30, Tuesday January 27, 2004 Where: St Johns II, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff Scribe: Timothy Lowe (RIPE NCC) Attendees: 132 B. Ranges of ipv6 addresses and their use (Jeroen Massar) http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-ipv6-ghost-route.pdf C. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-ipv6-global-routing.pdf D. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4 - Tunnel Detection Tool (Lorenzo Colitti, RIPE NCC, TTM project) http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-ipv6-tunnel-disco.pdf - IPv6 Network Management (Bernard Tuy) E. Operational issues with IPv6: RPSLng testing, policy issues, filtering practices, peering (Simon Leinen, Swiss IPv6 task force & ops group) http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-ipv6-swiss-peering.pdf F. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond - latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli (CERN)) --- From david.kessens at nokia.com Sat Sep 11 03:52:14 2004 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:52:14 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Draft agenda (v2) for ipv6 wg RIPE49 Message-ID: <20040911015214.GE7585@nokia.com> Hi, Please see below for the second version of our proposed agenda. We still have some time left, so proposals for additional agenda items that are useful for ipv6 Internet service providers are still welcome. You might have noticed that the minutes for RIPE 48 are still missing. I am working with the RIPE NCC to get them posted as soon as possible. I hope this helps, David Kessens --- Updated agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE49 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday September 22, 2004 Where: Medici Room, Renaissance Hotel, Manchester, UK A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing - approval of the minutes (David Kessens) B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) C. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) D. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? o TeliaSonera (Mikael Lind) o Others ? E. Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 assignments (Jordi Palet Martinez) http://www.europe.ipv6tf.org/PublicDocuments/guidelines_for_isp_on_ipv6_assignme+nt_to_customers_v1_2.pdf F. moonv6 (Jim Bound) -- break --- G. Update on multihoming solutions from IETF (Geoff Huston) H. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) I. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB --- From dr at cluenet.de Mon Sep 13 00:36:12 2004 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:36:12 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <413FF4A6.9080707@finnet.fi> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <413FF4A6.9080707@finnet.fi> Message-ID: <20040912223612.GA12641@srv01.cluenet.de> On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:13:58AM +0300, Jarno L?hteenm?ki wrote: > The report would be more usefull if you send a summary on a monthly > basis. Sending the report daily or even weekly is way too often... Point noted. I'm also thinking of extending the interval to bi-weekly or even monthly. > If needed you can provide daily snapshots somewhere else (a web page > perhaps?). As the report is done manually (with help of the automated tool "doc"), this is not really an option. Best regards, Daniel From dr at cluenet.de Mon Sep 13 00:58:24 2004 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 00:58:24 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <20040909071120.GB490@reifa.karrenberg.net> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> <1094659749.8934.37.camel@segesta.zurich.ibm.com> <20040909071120.GB490@reifa.karrenberg.net> Message-ID: <20040912225824.GB12641@srv01.cluenet.de> On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 09:11:20AM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > Daniel sent these messages to multiple mailing lists and he did not > take the hint when his messages were not re-distributed to nanog; I _did_ take a hint as someone pointed my to the possibility that NANOG auto-filters crossposts. Except for things like the CIDR report. I also _did_ take a look at NANOGs list policy which says that crossposts are discouraged, but not forbidden. > So I decided to give him another hint, You call that a hint? Many people have many options. I've got about 20 private feedback mail to the report, many of them from operators in charge of the analyzed zones, well-known names of the DNS scene and even large european TLD operators who asked me to do a similar report for their own TLD. Except some IXP operator who has a personal agenda, you were the only one complaining up to now. _This_ is a hint for me. > > Next to that, it is quite apparent that the operator(s) in question > > are not really watching their own infrastructure, which is basically > > their work, at all.... that gives one to wonder... > > I agree. But why do regular messages about this belong into the mailbox > of all subscribers of all the lists Daniel posts to? Be assured that NANOG, ipv6-wg and v6ops are for sure not the only lists I post to. But those are lists directly relevant in regard to the analyzed zones and reach the relevant audience, demonstratedly. > > > It would have been more acceptable to say something like: > > > "Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? > > > If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." > > > > Indeed, where can I request to signup for this as I think it is very > > useful .... > > Daniel? There is now a distro list at: http://lists.cluenet.de/mailman/listinfo/dns-report Nevertheless, having the report posted to a wide audience is important, as operators may notice situations where they want to take action. And the report has demonstrated it's success very well. Compare the first report three weeks ago: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail-archives/ipv6-wg/2004/msg00192.html with the upcoming report. Breakage everywhere, now all fixed. The CIDR report is posted weekly to upteen mailing lists, but is actually about a political/social/economic problem, not even a technical like infrastructure DNS zone breakage. Do you consider it as spam too? If not, can we say "double standards"? Hint: the CIDR report is posted to wide public for the very same reasons as the DNS Weather Report. And I'm actually sure you know exactly what those reasons are. Regards, Daniel From dr at cluenet.de Mon Sep 13 01:04:23 2004 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 01:04:23 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> Message-ID: <20040912230423.GC12641@srv01.cluenet.de> On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 05:07:22PM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists > is considered bad netiquette. And forwarding private email conversation to public mailinglists without asking correspondees permission is not considered bad netiquette? Double standards? > In your case even more so since similar and better defined reports > are available on demand from more than one source. Obviously those have NOT lead to getting problems fixed. I was SHOCKED about the ugly state of those vital infrastructure zones when I did the first survey. > It would have been more acceptable to say something like: > "Hey, I have made this useful report. What do you think about it? > If you are interested you can subscribe to regular reports here." That makes it easy to ignore the problems, eh? See my other mail where I compare with the CIDR report. > These days netiquette is violated so frequently that most people > do not even care to point things out to violators; > they just ignore messages from people who do not behave socially. > Procmail is an easy tool. Feel free to procmail me away. > [I spent 6 minutes composing this message. Multiply by n>20 / day] You've decided for yourself how much you expose yourself to public communication. Daniel From daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net Mon Sep 13 09:13:08 2004 From: daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net (Daniel Karrenberg) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 09:13:08 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] DNS Weather Report 2004-09-07 In-Reply-To: <20040912230423.GC12641@srv01.cluenet.de> References: <20040908150722.GA488@reifa.karrenberg.net> <20040912230423.GC12641@srv01.cluenet.de> Message-ID: <20040913071308.GA388@reifa.local> On 13.09 01:04, Daniel Roesen wrote: > On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 05:07:22PM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > > Sending *unsolicited* automatic reports to *multiple* mailing lists > > is considered bad netiquette. > > And forwarding private email conversation to public mailinglists > without asking correspondees permission is not considered bad > netiquette? Double standards? I am sorry about that. Due to multiple interrupts this message escaped before it was completely edited. It was almost excluseively my text anyway. And now I will really stop adding to this thread. Daniel From leo at ripe.net Mon Sep 13 11:10:02 2004 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:10:02 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2001:5000::/20 from the IANA in September 2004. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly. More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC can be found on our web site at: Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From david.kessens at nokia.com Tue Sep 14 06:49:08 2004 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 21:49:08 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Draft (v1) IPv6 WG minutes RIPE 48 Message-ID: <20040914044908.GA22987@nokia.com> Please see below for the draft minutes of RIPE 48. The minutes will be declared final at the next meeting if no substantial comments that require a revision of the minutes are received before next working group session at RIPE 49. I hope this helps, David Kessens --- Draft (v1) IPv6 Working Group Minutes RIPE48 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday May 5, 2004 Where: Grand Ballroom, Hotel Krasnapolsky, Amsterdam A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe: Timothy Lowe, RIPE NCC - agenda bashing ACTIONS - Chair, ask the mailing list if this document should become a RIPE document http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt - Community, provide feedback update on larger then default v6 allocations - Pim van Pelt (BIT BV) is looking for people who would like to run public 6to4 relays e-mail: pim at bit.nl or pim at ipng.nl B. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering, SPACENET) The rate of growth in IPv6 allocations is tapering off. There is public data available on the difference between allocated IPv4 space and BGP routed IPv4 space here: This site contains a number of reports on the status of the IPv4 address space, together with some observations about its trends in consumption of this resource. C. "per country view" about IPv6 allocation on the RIPE/NCC (Carlos Friacas, FCCN) D. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) Questions: Pim van Pelt, BIT BV - 6to4 public relays are at 80 Mbs sustained. We would like people who want to run public 6to4 relays to contact us: pim at bit.nl or pim at ipng.nl E. Raising RPSLng Awareness (Carlos Friacas, Simon Leinen and Joao Damas, ISC) The RPSLng protocol draft is nearing completion (http://www.radb.net/rpslng.html) F. Discussion of: http://ip6.de.easynet.net/ipv6-minimum-peering.txt Should this document become a RIPE document? ACTION on Chair - to take this to the mailing list H. Latest IPv6 Land Speed Record (Edoardo Martelli, CERN) - 15:08 G. IETF multi6 update (Kurtis Erik Lindqvist, Netnod Internet Exchange) There are two main camps in this discussion: Dividing the Identifier and addressing functions of the IP by a.) Using identifier tokens b.) Lightweight version without ID token distribution I. What are the deployment plans behind the larger then default ipv6 allocations (Jordi Palet Martinez as a liaison for Vodafoon) ACTION on Chair - keep this agenda point as an ongoing action. ACTION on community - send feedback for next RIPE meeting J. IPv6 home automation (Palet Jordi, Consulintel) There is a commercial powerline connectivity service operating in Zaragoza Spain. Currently in IPv4 but possibly in IPv6 in future. K. (brief) update from the RIPE NCC on ipv6 enabled services (Andrei Robachevsky, RIPE NCC) Verbal: These services are IPv6 enabled: DNS, whois, ttm, plan, new webserver, K root. N. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) NONE M. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) NONE L. IPv6 network management - IETF MIBs status, NetFlow v9, SNMPv6, and monitoring tools (Bernard Tuy - RENATER) K. AOB Skidder ip mapping tool for topology research. Trying to do this in v6 www.caida.org/~mjl/ From david.kessens at nokia.com Thu Sep 16 04:01:52 2004 From: david.kessens at nokia.com (David Kessens) Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:01:52 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Agenda for ipv6 wg RIPE49 Message-ID: <20040916020152.GB1259@nokia.com> Please see below for the agenda for the agenda for our session at RIPE49. Note that we have one topic on the agenda (Discussion of issues involved in deploying ipv6 in the DNS root) that is of interest for both DNS working group and ipv6 working group participants. Due to time considerations, we decided to have this topic discussed during the ipv6 working group session. Thanks & hope to see you all at RIPE 49, David Kessens --- Agenda for the IPv6 Working Group Meeting RIPE49 When: 14:00 - 18:00, Wednesday September 22, 2004 Where: Medici Room, Renaissance Hotel, Manchester, UK A. Administrative stuff - appointment of scribe - agenda bashing - approval of the minutes (David Kessens) B. Quick update from the RIPE NCC regarding ipv6 services (Andrei Robachevsky) C. Global IPv6 routing table status (Gert Doering) D. Report(s) about *actual* v6 traffic volume as compared to v4? *what's real* out there, not what's on powerpoint? (input from the audience) o IPv6 traffic in Geant (tentative) E. What are the deployment plans behind the larger ipv6 allocations ? o TeliaSonera (Mikael Lind) o Other big allocations (Jordi Palet Martinez) o Others ? F. Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 assignments (Jordi Palet Martinez) http://www.europe.ipv6tf.org/PublicDocuments/guidelines_for_isp_on_ipv6_assignme+nt_to_customers_v1_2.pdf -- break --- G. Discussion of issues involved in deploying ipv6 in the DNS root Speakers from the following root nameservers: B (tentative) F (speaker from ISC) I (speaker from Autonomica) K (tentative) H. Update on multihoming solutions from IETF (Geoff Huston) I. moonv6 (Jim Bound) J. Developments/initiatives regarding IPv6 in the RIPE region and beyond (input from the audience) K. Input for the RIPE NCC Activity Plan (input from the audience) Z. AOB --- From jeroen at unfix.org Sun Sep 19 13:28:48 2004 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:28:48 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New Ghost Route Hunter Utility: Prefix Compare Message-ID: <1095593327.1978.8395.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> Always wonder what was wrong with a prefix? Wondering which ISP's are not able to reach you and where it stops? GRH (Ghost Router Hunter *1) now has a new utility for doing prefix comparisons (*2). This feature was requested by Daniel R?sen for the purpose of comparing: 2001:5000::/21 with 2001:650::/32 (*3). Which are originated from the same ASN, but as the /21 is filtered at some places, have different or no paths to the participants (*4) that provide routes to GRH and many more ISP"s around the world. This utility thus allows you to see which participants of GRH do have the routes in question and the difference in the paths towards those participants. This allows a very quick view where a prefix is not accepted, most possibly of misconfigured filters. People who don't have, for instance, 2001:5000::/21 in their BGP, please figure out where the filtering is wrongly applied by looking at the utility and applying the current set of recommended filters, available from: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html It is good to see that ISP's have prefix filtering, but they really should update them. Though I'd rather see no prefix filtering but that they do RPF filtering on their customers. When you have (near) 0 IPv6 prefixes in your BGP, then you better start catching on ;) At the moment of writing you should have at least IPv6 499 prefixes, as then you have all the allocated, and currently announced, TLA's in your router, if you have less you are missing a number of them. For interested ISP's, GRH signup is, of course, free and can be done through the website (*5), the more peers join, the better the statistics of all the GRH utilities will be. Also, if you, like Daniel, miss a good utility, don't hesitate to bring it up. I would also like to thank all the already participating ISP's for providing their tables which have made it able to fix a large number of problems already over the almost 2 years GRH has been running. Last but not least, thanks to Daniel R?sen for the brilliant idea. Greets, Jeroen *1 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ *2 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/ *3 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/?a=2001:5000::/21&b=2001:650::/32 *4 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/participants/ *5 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/signup/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com Sun Sep 19 13:46:10 2004 From: bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com (bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:46:10 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: New Ghost Route Hunter Utility: Prefix Compare In-Reply-To: <1095593327.1978.8395.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> References: <1095593327.1978.8395.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20040919114610.GD2190@vacation.karoshi.com.> > Always wonder what was wrong with a prefix? Thanks for the great tool. I can now see which ASNs are proxy-aggregating my prefixes w/o authorization/permission. :) > It is good to see that ISP's have prefix filtering, but they really > should update them. Though I'd rather see no prefix filtering but that > they do RPF filtering on their customers. ... prefix filtering ought to reflect the desires of the authentic origin AS... :) > > I would also like to thank all the already participating ISP's for > providing their tables which have made it able to fix a large number of > problems already over the almost 2 years GRH has been running. > Last but not least, thanks to Daniel R?sen for the brilliant idea. > > Greets, > Jeroen > > *1 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ > *2 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/ > *3 = > http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/?a=2001:5000::/21&b=2001:650::/32 > *4 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/participants/ > *5 = http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/signup/ >