From jeroen at unfix.org Sat Jul 9 12:52:33 2005 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 12:52:33 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting multiple /32's) Message-ID: <1120906353.28697.6.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> I just noticed that UUNET/MCI got an additional 3 /32's: inet6num: 2001:4441::/32 netname: UUNET-AU-NETBLOCK-20050708 descr: UUNET Australia Limited descr: UUNET Network country: AU inet6num: 2001:4440::/32 netname: UUNET-HK-NETBLOCK-20050708 descr: UUNET Worldcom Hong Kong Ltd descr: UUNET Network country: HK inet6num: 2001:4442::/32 netname: UUNET-JP-NETBLOCK-20050708 descr: UUNET Japan, Ltd descr: UUNET Network country: JP They where all assigned to 1 person, who apparently works for UUNET/MCI in the US, not even the APNIC region, not even a role. Did somebody say goodbye to aggregation? Btw UUNET also has: 2001:600::/32 (Europe) Apparently nothing in the US, in total 4x /32. 4 slots gone away. Are all global companies going to request separate /32's ? 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 john at apnic.net Mon Jul 11 10:07:43 2005 From: john at apnic.net (John Tran) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:07:43 +1000 (EST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting multiple /32's)] Message-ID: Hi Jeroen, It is great to know that you are paying attention to allocations that are being made in other region. I would like to clarify the reason why APNIC made muliple allocations to UUNET. UUNET have multiple memberships with APNIC based on the networks in the region. As each economy, membership, managing their own address space therefore they also requesting for IP address separately. For aggregation purpose APNIC normally make allocations from contiguous block, as you can see from these allocations. This is similar to making a large allocation to an organisation then they further splitting between network for each economy. I hope the above explanation answered some of your queries if you need further information please feel free to contact us. Regards Son APNIC > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting > multiple /32's) > Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 12:52:33 +0200 > From: Jeroen Massar > Organization: Unfix > To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net > > I just noticed that UUNET/MCI got an additional 3 /32's: > > inet6num: 2001:4441::/32 > netname: UUNET-AU-NETBLOCK-20050708 > descr: UUNET Australia Limited > descr: UUNET Network > country: AU > > inet6num: 2001:4440::/32 > netname: UUNET-HK-NETBLOCK-20050708 > descr: UUNET Worldcom Hong Kong Ltd > descr: UUNET Network > country: HK > > inet6num: 2001:4442::/32 > netname: UUNET-JP-NETBLOCK-20050708 > descr: UUNET Japan, Ltd > descr: UUNET Network > country: JP > > They where all assigned to 1 person, who apparently works for UUNET/MCI > in the US, not even the APNIC region, not even a role. > > Did somebody say goodbye to aggregation? > > Btw UUNET also has: > 2001:600::/32 (Europe) > > Apparently nothing in the US, in total 4x /32. 4 slots gone away. > Are all global companies going to request separate /32's ? > > Greets, > Jeroen > > > > -- > > _____________________________________________________________________ > Anne Lord, Communications Director > Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61-7-3858-3100 > PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia Fax: +61-7-3858-3199 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > From jeroen at unfix.org Mon Jul 11 16:22:49 2005 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:22:49 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting multiple /32's)] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1121091769.15171.10.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 18:07 +1000, John Tran wrote: > Hi Jeroen, > > It is great to know that you are paying attention to allocations that are being > made in other region. I would like to clarify the reason why APNIC made muliple > allocations to UUNET. Of course I have an interrest, routing changes happening in the Asian region affect the rest of the world. And what if I decided to move around the world? RIR areas don't split up the internet ;) > UUNET have multiple memberships with APNIC based on the networks in the region. This could have sound plausible, but they are all assigned to 1 person according to the registry information, in the US which is not even the APNIC region, not to different organisations/memberships/economys whatever name you would give it. To me this just seems like a nice way to get PI space, while being the same provider. But we will see soon enough from which ASN's they get originated. Does this btw mean that we will soon see the various /20's and larger blocks being cut up to "region blocks", or even /32's being cut up to regional blocks, because that is easier for announcement and so that one does not have to carry it's own traffic around the world? One of the reasons, afaik, to give huge chucks to LIR's was to make sure that the routing table would stay at a minimum, but when RIR's start giving out /32's per country an ISP is in, then that won't hold true, especially in the AS department. In the latter case the RIR's could better opt for giving out /48's per organisation directly and help out in the multihoming problem quite a bit. > As each economy, membership, managing their own address space therefore they > also requesting for IP address separately. For aggregation purpose APNIC > normally make allocations from contiguous block, as you can see from these > allocations. This is similar to making a large allocation to an organisation > then they further splitting between network for each economy. Except that these are bound to be announced separately. Getting a block from ARIN, one from RIPE and one from APNIC seems plausible to me, but getting a block for every country one is in defeats the whole aggregation idea. Greets, Jeroen > > -------- Original Message -------- > > Subject: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting > > multiple /32's) > > Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 12:52:33 +0200 > > From: Jeroen Massar > > Organization: Unfix > > To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net > > > > I just noticed that UUNET/MCI got an additional 3 /32's: > > > > inet6num: 2001:4441::/32 > > netname: UUNET-AU-NETBLOCK-20050708 > > descr: UUNET Australia Limited > > descr: UUNET Network > > country: AU > > > > inet6num: 2001:4440::/32 > > netname: UUNET-HK-NETBLOCK-20050708 > > descr: UUNET Worldcom Hong Kong Ltd > > descr: UUNET Network > > country: HK > > > > inet6num: 2001:4442::/32 > > netname: UUNET-JP-NETBLOCK-20050708 > > descr: UUNET Japan, Ltd > > descr: UUNET Network > > country: JP > > > > They where all assigned to 1 person, who apparently works for UUNET/MCI > > in the US, not even the APNIC region, not even a role. > > > > Did somebody say goodbye to aggregation? > > > > Btw UUNET also has: > > 2001:600::/32 (Europe) > > > > Apparently nothing in the US, in total 4x /32. 4 slots gone away. > > Are all global companies going to request separate /32's ? -------------- 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 thuthuy at vnnic.net.vn Fri Jul 15 12:26:26 2005 From: thuthuy at vnnic.net.vn (Thu Thuy) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 17:26:26 +0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver Message-ID: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> Hi, all I'm in my way to investigate on ipv6 trial and implementation. Now i'm stucking with a quite big question on ipv6-enabled software. As i saw, ipv6 web services is entirely implemented in almost such large ipv6 research projects as KAME, WIDE, GEANT... In Japan, some ISPs offer ipv6 web hosting to their customers. Many websites support native ipv6 such as RIPE, APNIC... Could you pls show me what kind of webserver software be used in above-mentioned projects and organisations to fully implement ipv6 web service to users. Thanks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dr at cluenet.de Fri Jul 15 12:32:08 2005 From: dr at cluenet.de (Daniel Roesen) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 12:32:08 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Re: ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> Message-ID: <20050715103208.GA9432@srv01.cluenet.de> On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:26:26PM +0700, Thu Thuy wrote: > Could you pls show me what kind of webserver software be used in > above-mentioned projects and organisations to fully implement ipv6 > web service to users. Apache 2.0 http://httpd.apache.org/ Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0 From gert at space.net Fri Jul 15 16:34:38 2005 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:34:38 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> Message-ID: <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> Hi, On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:26:26PM +0700, Thu Thuy wrote: > Could you pls show me what kind of webserver software be used in above-mentioned projects and organisations to fully implement ipv6 web service to users. We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. Our reference machine is our corporate server, http://www.space.net/. Rumors say that recent Windows IIS's have IPv6 as well, but we have no experience with it. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234 From pim at ipng.nl Fri Jul 15 17:31:17 2005 From: pim at ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 17:31:17 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> Hi, Gert wrote: | We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not | in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. So have we, with a cluster of six Apache2 boxes running behind an IPv6 enabled loadbalancer. | Our reference machine is our corporate server, http://www.space.net/. http://www.bit.nl/ runs on our cluster as well. | Rumors say that recent Windows IIS's have IPv6 as well, but we have no | experience with it. We have a 4-box IIS6 cluster (DotNET). It has IPv6 on per default and it's also behind the same IPv6 capable loadbalancer. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From mohacsi at niif.hu Fri Jul 15 18:07:55 2005 From: mohacsi at niif.hu (Mohacsi Janos) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:07:55 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> Message-ID: <20050715174520.M24351@mignon.ki.iif.hu> What do you use for IPv6 loadbalancing? Best Regards, Janos Mohacsi Network Engineer, Research Associate NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE 21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98 On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Pim van Pelt wrote: > Hi, > > Gert wrote: > | We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not > | in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. > So have we, with a cluster of six Apache2 boxes running behind an IPv6 > enabled loadbalancer. > > | Our reference machine is our corporate server, http://www.space.net/. > http://www.bit.nl/ runs on our cluster as well. > > | Rumors say that recent Windows IIS's have IPv6 as well, but we have no > | experience with it. > We have a 4-box IIS6 cluster (DotNET). It has IPv6 on per default and > it's also behind the same IPv6 capable loadbalancer. > > groet, > Pim > -- > ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- > Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl > http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment > ----------------------------------------------- > > From berni at birkenwald.de Fri Jul 15 18:24:04 2005 From: berni at birkenwald.de (Bernhard Schmidt) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:24:04 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <20050715174520.M24351@mignon.ki.iif.hu> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> <20050715174520.M24351@mignon.ki.iif.hu> Message-ID: <42D7E324.3040902@birkenwald.de> Hi, > What do you use for IPv6 loadbalancing? as far as I know F5 BigIP v9 is the only one capable of doing that. Unfortunately they charge a serious amount of money (about 10kEUR per device) for a licence to use this feature. It is called "IPv6 Gateway Module" and reading their website you might think that it is only needed to gate between v4 and v6 (v6 client connecting to a v4 real server), but it won't even allow you to configure an IPv6 address on an interface without the licence key. Bernhard From gert at space.net Fri Jul 15 18:34:21 2005 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 18:34:21 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> Message-ID: <20050715163421.GH84850@Space.Net> Hi, On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:31:17PM +0200, Pim van Pelt wrote: > Gert wrote: > | We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not > | in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. > So have we, with a cluster of six Apache2 boxes running behind an IPv6 > enabled loadbalancer. Can you elaborate on the loadbalancer? What are you using for that? The "mainstream" devices (like Cisco CSS) don't seem to do IPv6 yet. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster at Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234 From pim at ipng.nl Fri Jul 15 21:55:16 2005 From: pim at ipng.nl (Pim van Pelt) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 21:55:16 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <20050715163421.GH84850@Space.Net> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> <20050715163421.GH84850@Space.Net> Message-ID: <20050715195516.GB18959@bfib.ipng.nl> Mohacsi, Gert, | > | We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not | > | in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. | > So have we, with a cluster of six Apache2 boxes running behind an IPv6 | > enabled loadbalancer. | | Can you elaborate on the loadbalancer? What are you using for that? | The "mainstream" devices (like Cisco CSS) don't seem to do IPv6 yet. We use F5 Networks BigIP as Bernhard suggested. We are extremely pleased with the boxes (two 3400s in active/passive resillience mode). We have bought most generally available licences including the (quite expensive) IPv6 one. I must admit though: somebody has to foot the bill for IPv6 development and this product is well worth supporting. Pre- as well as postsales support is magnificent and the boxes have not shown any unexplained behavior since we brought them up in the beginning of 2005. groet, Pim -- ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment ----------------------------------------------- From thuthuy at vnnic.net.vn Mon Jul 18 04:43:18 2005 From: thuthuy at vnnic.net.vn (Thu Thuy) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 09:43:18 +0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> <20050715163421.GH84850@Space.Net> <20050715195516.GB18959@bfib.ipng.nl> Message-ID: <014101c58b42$746a8ed0$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> Hi, Thank you all for your supports. Collect information from your emails, i saw Apache2 is a very popular solution to choose when offering ipv6 web service. Pls don't laugh at me, i used to try Apache2 in my lab. However, my website i tried is very simple one with html only. And now is just my very matter: as my knowledge, Apace2 doesn't support Java application. So how can I use Apace2 to offer a fully application-website like our present ipv4 one (hosted in Sunone webserver). Say in another way, make our ipv4 website support both ipv4/ipv6. That's why i would like to find our about web servers already used in APNIC, RIPE, Kame, other organisations... to see if they use any other webserver than Apache2. When offer ipv6 web service with Apache2, how to make it fully support java applications ? Pls help me once more ! Thanks. Have a wonderful new week. Thuy. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pim van Pelt" To: "Gert Doering" Cc: "Pim van Pelt" ; "Thu Thuy" ; Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 2:55 AM Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver > Mohacsi, Gert, > > | > | We use Apache2 for IPv6 enabled web hosting customers (<< and we're not > | > | in Japan, we're in Europe/Germany :) ), and have had good success with it. > | > So have we, with a cluster of six Apache2 boxes running behind an IPv6 > | > enabled loadbalancer. > | > | Can you elaborate on the loadbalancer? What are you using for that? > | The "mainstream" devices (like Cisco CSS) don't seem to do IPv6 yet. > We use F5 Networks BigIP as Bernhard suggested. We are extremely pleased with > the boxes (two 3400s in active/passive resillience mode). We have bought > most generally available licences including the (quite expensive) IPv6 one. > > I must admit though: somebody has to foot the bill for IPv6 development > and this product is well worth supporting. Pre- as well as postsales > support is magnificent and the boxes have not shown any unexplained > behavior since we brought them up in the beginning of 2005. > > groet, > Pim > > -- > ---------- - - - - -+- - - - - ---------- > Pim van Pelt Email: pim at ipng.nl > http://www.ipng.nl/ IPv6 Deployment > ----------------------------------------------- > > From mohacsi at niif.hu Mon Jul 18 10:34:41 2005 From: mohacsi at niif.hu (Mohacsi Janos) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 10:34:41 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] ipv6-enabled webserver In-Reply-To: <014101c58b42$746a8ed0$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> References: <02ff01c58927$a7f97300$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> <20050715143438.GC84850@Space.Net> <20050715153117.GA17319@bfib.ipng.nl> <20050715163421.GH84850@Space.Net> <20050715195516.GB18959@bfib.ipng.nl> <014101c58b42$746a8ed0$100977cb@NGUYENTHUTHUY> Message-ID: <20050718102923.T85059@mignon.ki.iif.hu> On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Thu Thuy wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you all for your supports. > Collect information from your emails, i saw Apache2 is a very popular > solution to choose when offering ipv6 web service. Pls don't laugh at me, i > used to try Apache2 in my lab. However, my website i tried is very simple > one with html only. And now is just my very matter: as my knowledge, Apace2 > doesn't support Java application. So how can I use Apace2 to offer a fully > application-website like our present ipv4 one (hosted in Sunone webserver). > Say in another way, make our ipv4 website support both ipv4/ipv6. > > That's why i would like to find our about web servers already used in APNIC, > RIPE, Kame, other organisations... to see if they use any other webserver > than Apache2. When offer ipv6 web service with Apache2, how to make it fully > support java applications ? You can use Tomcat with Apache2 if you prefer open-source solutions and you need IPv6 support. However SunONE Webserver 6 does support IPv6. Regards, Janos Mohacsi Network Engineer, Research Associate NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE 21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98 From hph at oslo.net Tue Jul 19 13:38:32 2005 From: hph at oslo.net (Hans Petter Holen) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 13:38:32 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting multiple /32's)] In-Reply-To: <1121091769.15171.10.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> References: <1121091769.15171.10.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> Message-ID: <42DCE638.30307@oslo.net> Jeroen Massar wrote: > >Except that these are bound to be announced separately. >Getting a block from ARIN, one from RIPE and one from APNIC seems >plausible to me, but getting a block for every country one is in defeats >the whole aggregation idea. > I dont really se what the benefit of getting different blocks from dfferent RIRs have. I get one single block I have the choice of announcing it as one prefix or as multiple prefixes. If I get multiple blocks I only have the choice of annoincing it as multiple prefixes. -hph From jeroen at unfix.org Tue Jul 19 14:32:02 2005 From: jeroen at unfix.org (Jeroen Massar) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 14:32:02 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Allocation behaviour (organisations getting multiple /32's)] In-Reply-To: <42DCE638.30307@oslo.net> References: <1121091769.15171.10.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> <42DCE638.30307@oslo.net> Message-ID: <1121776322.32368.13.camel@firenze.zurich.ibm.com> On Tue, 2005-07-19 at 13:38 +0200, Hans Petter Holen wrote: > Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > > >Except that these are bound to be announced separately. > >Getting a block from ARIN, one from RIPE and one from APNIC seems > >plausible to me, but getting a block for every country one is in defeats > >the whole aggregation idea. > > > > I dont really se what the benefit of getting different blocks from > dfferent RIRs have. So that you don't have to haul traffic arriving in Africa for the site in US over your own network. Just one of the many traffic engineering issues when you are only announcing one single prefix. > I get one single block I have the choice of > announcing it as one prefix or as multiple prefixes. If I get multiple > blocks I only have the choice of annoincing it as multiple prefixes. Thus, you hereby say, that every organisation should get a large block and simply split it up, to whatever extent they think suitable, and announce multiple smaller prefixes? What is the use of "Provider *Aggregated*" again? Why not call it "Provider Block" then because it will not be aggregated any more when splitting it up. Do also note that there are a couple of organisations already announcing /48's out of /32's and typically, due to filtering >/32, these prefixes have nice 'around the world' (as in packets go around the world, not that they are reachable) connectivity. 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 leo at ripe.net Wed Jul 20 10:54:53 2005 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 10:54:53 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC Message-ID: <56EE9A3C-5CC8-403B-8B20-C86914F7305E@ripe.net> Dear Colleagues, The RIPE NCC received the IPv6 address range 2A01:0000::/23 from the IANA in July 2005. We will begin making allocations from this block in the near future. 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: https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html This document has been updated to to provide extra information about the IPv6 address space we manage, following some requests we received. I hope people find the new format useful. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net Thu Jul 21 11:04:47 2005 From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 09:04:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <56EE9A3C-5CC8-403B-8B20-C86914F7305E@ripe.net> References: <56EE9A3C-5CC8-403B-8B20-C86914F7305E@ripe.net> Message-ID: On Wed, 20 Jul 2005, leo vegoda wrote: Hi, > More information on the IP space administered by the RIPE NCC > can be found on our web site at: > > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html > > This document has been updated to to provide extra information > about the IPv6 address space we manage, following some requests we > received. could please explain why not all RIPE IPv6 address space is listed in the longest prefix tables? e.g. I am missing information about 2003::/19 and 2A00::/21 (though well known;). -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT From leo at ripe.net Thu Jul 21 11:09:05 2005 From: leo at ripe.net (leo vegoda) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:09:05 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: References: <56EE9A3C-5CC8-403B-8B20-C86914F7305E@ripe.net> Message-ID: <3A9C54A9-677A-4B4B-8092-8751D0B12DAA@ripe.net> Hi Bjoern, On Jul 21, 2005, at 11:04 am, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: [...] > could please explain why not all RIPE IPv6 address space is listed in > the longest prefix tables? e.g. I am missing information about > 2003::/19 and 2A00::/21 (though well known;). That's human error. Sorry. We need to re-publish the document with the complete list. I'll get this done as soon as possible. Regards, -- leo vegoda Registration Services Manager RIPE NCC From bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net Fri Jul 22 13:17:46 2005 From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:17:46 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to RIPE NCC In-Reply-To: <3A9C54A9-677A-4B4B-8092-8751D0B12DAA@ripe.net> References: <56EE9A3C-5CC8-403B-8B20-C86914F7305E@ripe.net> <3A9C54A9-677A-4B4B-8092-8751D0B12DAA@ripe.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, leo vegoda wrote: Hi, > On Jul 21, 2005, at 11:04 am, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote: > > [...] > > > could please explain why not all RIPE IPv6 address space is listed in > > the longest prefix tables? e.g. I am missing information about > > 2003::/19 and 2A00::/21 (though well known;). > > That's human error. Sorry. > > We need to re-publish the document with the complete list. I'll get > this done as soon as possible. Thanks:) -- Bjoern A. Zeeb bzeeb at Zabbadoz dot NeT From asaha at ixiacom.com Mon Jul 25 18:26:25 2005 From: asaha at ixiacom.com (Aviraj Saha) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 09:26:25 -0700 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: raw ipv6 sockets - sin6_scope_id field Message-ID: <001d01c59135$9b700070$7911cd0a@ixiacom.com> Hi This value needs to be set to the interface index which is returned by the "ip link" command if you are using link local address, and if the 3 rd and 4 th byte is zero. Otherwise the value which is set in the third and fourth byte of the in6_addr structure. Hope this answers your question. With Regards Aviraj Saha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From webmaster at ripe.net Wed Jul 27 15:44:27 2005 From: webmaster at ripe.net (RIPE NCC Document Announcement Service) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:44:27 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] New Document available: RIPE-349 Message-ID: <200507271344.j6RDiRmq024813@birch.ripe.net> New RIPE Document Announcement -------------------------------------- A new document is available from the RIPE Document store. Ref: ripe-349 Title: Address Space Managed by the RIPE NCC Author: Leo Vegoda RIPE NCC Date: 27 July 2005 Format: PDF=31257 TXT=2986 Obsoletes: ripe-348 Short content description ------------------------- This document details the address space managed by the RIPE NCC and the longest prefixes allocated or assigned from different address ranges. The new version was needed to correct errors in the previous document. Accessing the RIPE Document store --------------------------------- You can access this RIPE Documents in HTML format at: http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-349.html The RIPE Document Store is also available via anonymous FTP to ftp.ripe.net, in the directory ripe/docs. The URLs for the new document on the FTP-server are: ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-349.pdf PDF version ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-349.txt plain text version