From peter at digitalinfrastructures.nl Thu Mar 11 13:59:03 2010 From: peter at digitalinfrastructures.nl (Peter van Eijk) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:59:03 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] fyi: dutch special issue coming up. Message-ID: <017201cac11a$a0deb1e0$e29c15a0$@nl> Hi everybody, For those of you who read Dutch and are not a member of the dutch IPv6 taskforce list, I have just posted an announcement for the special issue of a dutch IT management magazine on ipv6-tf at ams-ix.net Regards Peter van Eijk, +31 6 2268 4939, peter @ digitalinfrastructures.nl From millnert at csbnet.se Thu Mar 11 15:42:08 2010 From: millnert at csbnet.se (Martin Millnert) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:42:08 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD In-Reply-To: <3CA66B76-B6E9-4E2D-A248-E9A5BB3162EF@ripe.net> References: <3CA66B76-B6E9-4E2D-A248-E9A5BB3162EF@ripe.net> Message-ID: <1268318528.2878.144.camel@hsa.vpn.anti> Hello list, On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 14:28 +0100, Alex Le Heux wrote: > Dear Colleagues, > > During the discussion on the APWG list about 6rd, several people have > inquired about the exact way Registration Services evaluates requests > for 6rd deployment. This email will try to answer these inquiries. > > The RIPE NCC considers current policy to be completely agnostic to > 6rd, it neither specifically supports nor disallows 6rd deployment. > This means that Registration Services will evaluate IPv6 allocation > requests that include 6rd deployments according to the established > policies and procedures of justified need. > Another LIR, who has 3 million customers, intends to deploy 6rd with / > 60 assignments. Currently, the IPRA would consider 3 million /60 > assignments to fit into a /38, thus the default /32, while the 6rd > deployment would require a /28. > > Note that neither of these LIRs would qualify easily for an additional > allocation under the HD-ratio rules. I am curious how LIRs that employ 6RD today plan to motivate their need for the 15 extra /32:s they would be allocated following the example above, with the /28-instead-of-/32, once the 6RD transition phase is complete. IIRC RIPE are currently spacing their /32 assignments on a /29 basis. Eg, anticimex at hsa:~$ for i in `seq 0 8`; do whois 2a02:9a$i::/32 | egrep '(inet6num|netname)' ; done inet6num: 2a02:9a0::/32 netname: SE-SCS-20090203 inet6num: 2a00::/12 netname: EU-ZZ-2A00 [...] inet6num: 2a02:9a8::/32 netname: IT-SPIN-20090204 I guess that it would be trivial to fall back to the first /32, or whatever less-than-6RD-inflated prefix you had before, once the transition is over, as long as the LIR plans ahead accordingly. Best regards, -- Martin Millnert -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From eduabume at yahoo.com Sat Mar 13 21:30:11 2010 From: eduabume at yahoo.com (Edu Abume) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:30:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment Message-ID: <972032.83568.qm@web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> ________________________________ From: Edu Abume To: ipv6-wg at ripe.net Sent: Sat, March 13, 2010 1:24:35 PM Subject: Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment Hi Does anyone know the average period for IPv6 deployment. What is the estimate for small and large sized organization? Are the transition mechanisms the same for these organizations? Thanks and awaiting reply. Edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eduabume at yahoo.com Sat Mar 13 21:24:35 2010 From: eduabume at yahoo.com (Edu Abume) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 12:24:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ipv6-wg] Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment Message-ID: <338651.24718.qm@web110012.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hi Does anyone know the average period for IPv6 deployment. What is the estimate for small and large sized organization? Are the transition mechanisms the same for these organizations? Thanks and awaiting reply. Edu -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gert at space.net Sun Mar 14 00:00:15 2010 From: gert at space.net (Gert Doering) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:00:15 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment In-Reply-To: <972032.83568.qm@web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <972032.83568.qm@web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100313230015.GE69383@Space.Net> Hi, On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:30:11PM -0800, Edu Abume wrote: > Does anyone know the average period for IPv6 deployment. What is the > estimate for small and large sized organization? We're working on it since about 13 years... > Are the transition mechanisms the same for these organizations? Which transition mechanisms make sense are very much different depending on the organization type, network structure, existing hardware, and on the *goals* to be reached (as in "have IPv6 everywhere" or "enable IPv6 at some key network elements, e.g. the internet facing proxy"). For us, "dual-stack everywhere" is the way to go, but this will be very different for other organizations. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 150584 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From isacco.fontana at trentinonetwork.it Sun Mar 14 06:00:28 2010 From: isacco.fontana at trentinonetwork.it (Isacco Fontana) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 06:00:28 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment In-Reply-To: <20100313230015.GE69383@Space.Net> References: <972032.83568.qm@web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20100313230015.GE69383@Space.Net> Message-ID: <4B9C6D6C.2080502@trentinonetwork.it> Gert Doering ha scritto: > Hi, > > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 12:30:11PM -0800, Edu Abume wrote: > >> Does anyone know the average period for IPv6 deployment. What is the >> estimate for small and large sized organization? >> > > We're working on it since about 13 years... > > >> Are the transition mechanisms the same for these organizations? >> > > Which transition mechanisms make sense are very much different depending > on the organization type, network structure, existing hardware, and > on the *goals* to be reached (as in "have IPv6 everywhere" or "enable > IPv6 at some key network elements, e.g. the internet facing proxy"). > > For us, "dual-stack everywhere" is the way to go, but this will be > very different for other organizations. > > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > Hi, If I can help you we're starting to delivery ipv6 on our backbone (about 90 PE). Our infrastucture is mpls but the ipv6 mpls control plane isn't yet implemented by vendors so we chosen implement dual-stack on GRT followed by 6VPE (dual-stack) for vpn mpls. The plan to deploy was divided: 1) Planning 2) Upgrade backbone 3) Deploy Total time: 2 years for backbone Other problem is related to customers. We can't force to change or upgrade the end-point devices ($$!!) so the time delivery for customers will be longer. Isacco --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mtinka at globaltransit.net Sun Mar 14 06:34:29 2010 From: mtinka at globaltransit.net (Mark Tinka) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 13:34:29 +0800 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Re: Expected time frame for IPv6 deployment In-Reply-To: <4B9C6D6C.2080502@trentinonetwork.it> References: <972032.83568.qm@web110013.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20100313230015.GE69383@Space.Net> <4B9C6D6C.2080502@trentinonetwork.it> Message-ID: <201003141334.34242.mtinka@globaltransit.net> On Sunday 14 March 2010 01:00:28 pm Isacco Fontana wrote: > If I can help you we're starting to delivery ipv6 on our > backbone (about 90 PE). Our infrastucture is mpls but > the ipv6 mpls control plane isn't yet implemented by > vendors... The promises continue to be just that, many years on... > so we chosen implement dual-stack on GRT > followed by 6VPE (dual-stack) for vpn mpls. A reasonable plan. > The plan to deploy was divided: > 1) Planning > 2) Upgrade backbone > 3) Deploy > Total time: 2 years for backbone > > Other problem is related to customers. We can't force to > change or upgrade the end-point devices ($$!!) so the > time delivery for customers will be longer. Indeed, but if you can get your backbone ready that'll be a huge step. All the best. Cheers, Mark. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: From shane at isc.org Wed Mar 17 13:12:58 2010 From: shane at isc.org (Shane Kerr) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:12:58 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? Message-ID: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> Hey all, I noticed this site in someone's signature: http://ipv4depletion.com/ It uses a different prediction than the well-known one by Geoff Huston, although the results are not too different (which I guess is good): http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 Interesting. :) -- Shane From Jon.Harald.Bovre at hafslund.no Wed Mar 17 14:21:55 2010 From: Jon.Harald.Bovre at hafslund.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?B=F8vre_Jon_Harald?=) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:21:55 +0100 Subject: SV: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? In-Reply-To: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> Message-ID: Been watching this site for some months, amazing how fast APNIC burns v4. http://www.ipv4depletion.com/old.html Data behind the prediction seems to be more updated - And I believe it takes better care of gentlemens agreement for what happens with the last few blocks. Jon Harald B?vre http://Ipv6.hafslundtelekom.net -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-admin at ripe.net] P? vegne av Shane Kerr Sendt: 17. mars 2010 13:13 Til: ipv6-wg Emne: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? Hey all, I noticed this site in someone's signature: http://ipv4depletion.com/ It uses a different prediction than the well-known one by Geoff Huston, although the results are not too different (which I guess is good): http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 Interesting. :) -- Shane From kristoff at belbone.net Wed Mar 17 16:08:32 2010 From: kristoff at belbone.net (Kristoff Bonne) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:08:32 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? In-Reply-To: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> References: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> Message-ID: <4BA0F070.3030507@belbone.net> Hi, Shane Kerr schreef: > I noticed this site in someone's signature: > http://ipv4depletion.com/ > It uses a different prediction than the well-known one by Geoff Huston, > although the results are not too different (which I guess is good): > http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 > I have HE's "bye bye v4" applet running in my iGoogle, which bases itself on the statistics from poratoo.net, and that one has a prediction-date of October the 1st 2011 (562 days to go). Anybody any idea why there is almost 200 days of difference between these two predections? > Shane > Cheerio! Kr. Bonne. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5140 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From sander at steffann.nl Wed Mar 17 17:06:19 2010 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:06:19 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? In-Reply-To: <4BA0F070.3030507@belbone.net> References: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> <4BA0F070.3030507@belbone.net> Message-ID: Hi Kristoff, > Shane Kerr schreef: >> I noticed this site in someone's signature: >> http://ipv4depletion.com/ >> It uses a different prediction than the well-known one by Geoff Huston, >> although the results are not too different (which I guess is good): >> http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 >> > I have HE's "bye bye v4" applet running in my iGoogle, which bases itself on the statistics from poratoo.net, and that one has a prediction-date of October the 1st 2011 (562 days to go). > > Anybody any idea why there is almost 200 days of difference between these two predections? The difference is explained on http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 (section "Compare the different estimate") - Sander From gih at apnic.net Wed Mar 17 20:18:19 2010 From: gih at apnic.net (Geoff Huston) Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 06:18:19 +1100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IANA depletion in less than 1 year? In-Reply-To: References: <1268827978.17703.7885.camel@shane-asus-laptop> <4BA0F070.3030507@belbone.net> Message-ID: On 18/03/2010, at 3:06 AM, Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi Kristoff, > >> Shane Kerr schreef: >>> I noticed this site in someone's signature: >>> http://ipv4depletion.com/ >>> It uses a different prediction than the well-known one by Geoff Huston, >>> although the results are not too different (which I guess is good): >>> http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 >>> >> I have HE's "bye bye v4" applet running in my iGoogle, which bases itself on the statistics from poratoo.net, and that one has a prediction-date of October the 1st 2011 (562 days to go). >> >> Anybody any idea why there is almost 200 days of difference between these two predections? > > The difference is explained on http://ipv4depletion.com/?page_id=4 (section "Compare the different estimate") I had a shot at explaining the differences as well in http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2009-05/ipv4model.html. - The published ARIN data is different as they use a different method of recording a subsequent allocation that fits within an existing assignment window than the other RIRs. I comb back through the diffs in the ARIN data and use an altered file that attempts to correct this. - I use smoothing across the data before attempting to perform a least squares best fit. The assignment data is "chunky" because 50% of the addresses head out in 1% of the allocations. If you don't smooth the data the large allocation events tend to bias the model to predicted higher consumption. - I've been used an order 2 polynomial for the curve fit, rather than exponential. it looks to me that it offers a better fit (see http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/fig24.png for a comparison of linear, exponential and O(2) polynomial fit) These are just mathematical models, and like any predictive model they assume that tomorrow is derived from today. In reality tomorrow is the combination of many factors, and, thankfully, tomorrow still holds some element of uncertainty! I'd like to quote the last section of the article I wrote last year in May 2009, as I think its relevant: "It is certainly possible to tweak this model in various ways. The RIR allocation algorithm could be refined to take into account weekdays and weekends, and also simulate the range of individual allocation sizes for each RIR. I could also use Fourier analysis to extract out some of the strong periodic elements in the data series and use these functions to form the predictive model. Alternatively, the least squares best fit algorithm could use a weighting on the data points to give a higher weighting to more recent data over older data. The RIR data could be assessed in further detail to resolve some of the lingering inconsistencies. "But, ultimately the real question here is what would all this refinement to the address consumption model achieve over and above what we already know about this situation in terms of its predictive capability? "Its clear to say that the exhaustion of the unallocated IPv4 address pools within the current distribution regime is as close to a certainty as anything is in this world. Sometime soon, or maybe a little sooner, or maybe just a little later, the IPv4 unallocated address pools will run out for each RIR, and at that stage changes will necessarily come into play. Within two or maybe three years from today the current lines of supply of IPv4 addresses will probably dry up. Given the skewed nature of the distribution of allocations it is difficult to be any more precise than this and although the mathematical model may claim today that exhaustion will occur at 10:32 am on the 14th of June 2011, the range of uncertainty in such a prediction spans years rather than seconds. No matter when it does occur, after that time the life of an IPv4-only network will start to get quite messy and certainly very expensive, and it will only get worse from then over time. "If this looming exhaustion of the current supply of IPv4 addresses isn't a sufficiently loud and clear message to each and every player in this industry to DEPLOY IPV6 PRODUCTS AND SERVICES NOW! then I'm very much afraid that no other message is going to work either." regards, Geoff From shane at time-travellers.org Fri Mar 19 15:55:13 2010 From: shane at time-travellers.org (Shane Kerr) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:55:13 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Call for agenda items for RIPE in Prague Message-ID: <4BA39051.70805@time-travellers.org> Hello all, The next RIPE meeting in Prague is coming up. We would like your input on the agenda for the meeting. We are hoping to have a brainstorming session at the beginning of the IPv6 working group, to try to come up with some ideas about how we can achieve the goals in our new charter. We would also like other items. Our intention is to look at each topic and try to get ones of interest to the larger RIPE community in the EOF portion of the meeting, and have the IPv6 working group focus on things interesting to people working in the IPv6 world. All items that are IPv6-related are of interest. Please send your proposals to David, Marco, or myself - all reasonable offers considered. Your friendly co-chair, -- Shane From mir at ripe.net Thu Mar 25 15:26:15 2010 From: mir at ripe.net (Mirjam Kuehne) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 15:26:15 +0100 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Measuring IPv6 at Web Clients and Caching Resolvers Message-ID: <4BAB7287.5070602@ripe.net> [apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, As the remaining IPv4 space continues to shrink, it?s important to keep an eye on how the IPv6 Internet develops. We prototyped a method to measure the IPv6 capabilities of caching DNS resolvers that end-users use when browsing the web. The results of these measurements are now published on RIPE Labs: 1. A summary of the measurements and results can be found here: http://labs.ripe.net/content/measuring-ipv6-web-clients-and-caching-resolvers-part-1 2. Some more detailed analysis (including a breakdown of IPv6 usage per country and city) are here: http://labs.ripe.net/content/measuring-ipv6-web-clients-and-caching-resolvers-part-2-country-level-and-other-statistics 3. The methodology we use for these measurements are described here: http://labs.ripe.net/content/measuring-ipv6-web-clients-and-caching-resolvers-part-3-methodology All articles can be accessed from the RIPE Labs home page at http://labs.ripe.net If you have any comments or suggestions, please do not hesitate to submit them to the RIPE Labs forum or send them directly to me. Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC From mir at ripe.net Tue Mar 30 16:43:26 2010 From: mir at ripe.net (Mirjam Kuehne) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:43:26 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Spam sent over IPv6 - See results on RIPE Labs Message-ID: <4BB20E0E.4080300@ripe.net> [apologies for duplicates] Dear colleagues, We were curious to see how much spam is sent over IPv6 these days. Find the results on RIPE Labs: http://labs.ripe.net/content/spam-over-ipv6 We will continue to measure this. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let us know. Kind Regards, Mirjam K?hne From roberts at isoc.org Tue Mar 30 17:30:10 2010 From: roberts at isoc.org (Phil Roberts) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:30:10 -0500 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Internet Society IPv6 Workshop Message-ID: <4BB21902.6030803@isoc.org> The Internet Society is hosting an IPv6 Deployment Day on April 22 in Seattle, Washington. The meeting is intended for operators who have deployed, are deploying, or are planning to deploy IPv6 in their networks. The proposed topics include business related issues for IPv6 deployment, discussion of pitfalls in IPv6 deployment, and specific technical issues due to IPv6 deployment that potentially affect the whole Internet. This is an open meeting and all are welcome, but space is limited so you will need to register: https://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences/registration/?id=7ce20e4c88b7e328. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me, Phil Roberts (roberts at isoc.org), or Mat Ford (ford at isoc.org). From marcoh at marcoh.net Tue Mar 30 19:46:17 2010 From: marcoh at marcoh.net (Marco Hogewoning) Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:46:17 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 Pilot in NL: seeking customers Message-ID: <5BC05830-DEFE-49BF-B5DC-0B39C736EBD7@marcoh.net> (wearing my XS4ALL hat) We just announced to the media we are expanding our current trials to support native IPv6 over DSL to 1000 lines. These 1000 places are given away on a first come first serve basis. To give everybody a fair chance people can subscribe to this pilot starting Friday April 2nd, 12:00 CEST. In this pilot we ask for people to supply their own DSL cpe which is IPv6 capable or even hack around with linux images where possible. This pilot will serve 3 main goals: - Test interoperability between our gear and setup and the solitions currently on the market - Test those CPE solutions in the wild, we tested some of them in our own lab but it's hardly the same as everyday use in a random residential environement. - Fine tune our support procedures and figure out what training is needed. Next to that We'd love to see what problems will arise when IPv6 is switched on in a regular residential networking environment. Now obviously, since this is a DSL pilot there are some geographical boundaries on who can enter. If you happen to live in the Netherlands and are an XS4ALL customer please do subscribe. We already posted a list with some of the CPE we have tested and are known to work, these include some AVM FRITZ!Box models, some cisco SOHO boxes (8xx serie) and the latest release of Draytek Vigor. If you happen to know some others or happen to built DSL modems yourself, please contact me of list. Basic requirements are ADSL2+ with PPPoA, IPCP and IPv6CP using DHCPv6-PD to get the addresses. As a first result, the press release was picked up by a lot of media and the comments are mostly positive. Hopefully in a few weeks time we have some more data to report on. The original annoucement (in Dutch): http://www.xs4all.nl/klant/ipv6/ MarcoH