From GeertJan.deGroot at xs4all.nl Sun Jun 1 17:54:43 2014 From: GeertJan.deGroot at xs4all.nl (Geert Jan de Groot) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 17:54:43 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network (not just at RIPE xx meeting) Message-ID: Hi all, Not attending RIPE-meetings myself anymore these days, I'm not sure whether (just) a IPv6-only network at a meeting is going to cut it. This has been done for a number of years worth of meetings and while the results are interesting, I'm not sure that a RIPE-meeting is a requirement to run these experiments. It makes perfect sense to run a V6-only network at home/office and get the experience all year, not just during a meeting. So, as a typical home user these days, I run a V6-network, some pieces of it being V6-only, other places being V6-preferred, and the experiences are, eumm, mixed. I frequently find sites (at various ISP's) that are either partially or fully broken for V6. In many instances, happy eyeballs rescues things, that is, things seem just slow but not entirely broken unless one analyzes. Reporting a V6-broken website to it's hoster is, in many cases, a waiste of time. Helpdesks don't understand the problem. If I'm lucky I get a response. Problems are seldom resolved. I think I see this five times per month or so. Perhaps I should browse less. Thing is, we seem to be working on making the Internet V6-capable, but currently V6 performance and stability is a serious issue, especially when it comes to reporting problems. Happy eyeballs mean that the V6-network can, in many cases, just be switched off without anybody noticing. We all know of stories of support/helpdesk folk telling people just to switch off V6. That's all nice if it'd just be an academic exercise but not if it is supposed to be the main bread and butter in the years to come. So, my question to the WG: does the WG think this is a problem, and can we think of a way to get clueful v6 complaints to clueful handlers, instead of being ignored / misaddressed / ...? Geert Jan From bs at stepladder-it.com Sun Jun 1 22:06:55 2014 From: bs at stepladder-it.com (Benedikt Stockebrand) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 20:06:55 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network (not just at RIPE xx meeting) In-Reply-To: (Geert Jan de Groot's message of "Sun, 01 Jun 2014 17:54:43 +0200") References: Message-ID: <87r438s8bk.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Hi Geert Jan and list, Geert Jan de Groot writes: > [...] Thing is, we seem to be working on making the Internet V6-capable, > but currently V6 performance and stability is a serious issue, especially > when it comes to reporting problems. [...] the Good News[TM] here is that with an increasing number of DS-Lite deployments, these will likely put the pressure on those web sites money-wise: If the site appears sluggish or unstable to an increasing number of people who don't have proper (in the broadest possible sense and explicitly including NAT) IPv4 connectivity, the owners of those web sites will eventually notice that they have a problem. I think we are offering these people all the help they need, but until they actually want our help, that's pretty much all we can do. We can spread the word best we can, but we can't force people to listen. > So, my question to the WG: does the WG think this is a problem, Definitely, but: At the few IETF meetings I've been to before they started the sunset4 WG I've been rather frustrated by the v6ops WG being swamped with transition/somebody-save-my-IPv4 topics. We better be careful that this doesn't happen here as well. > and can we think of a way to get clueful v6 complaints to clueful > handlers, instead of being ignored / misaddressed / ...? The problem of getting first level support up and running with IPv6 is tremendous, and some people put significant effort into dealing with this. What else can we do at this point? On a more general scale: As far as I am personally concerned, rather than putting effort into convincing people who simply refuse to accept that there's something that they have to take care of, I personally rather focus my energy on those people who have realized so and come for help. That is where I can make a difference. After all, anybody in IT should have heard of IPv6 and why we need it by now; it isn't a well kept secret at all. The problem is not that people don't know, it is that people don't care. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From oskar at cetex.se Sun Jun 1 23:26:51 2014 From: oskar at cetex.se (Oskar Stenman) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 23:26:51 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network (not just at RIPE xx meeting) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7j5tskjfoto576vhpyuah0a4.1401657599761@email.android.com> I guess this is one of the larger issues with running multiple protocols in parallel :) One solution as a content-provider would be to get the services to be v6-only, and then implement workarounds (for example stateless nat46, 4to6 loadbalancers) on the edge to get the service on to v4 Internet. Most people monitor v4 and if v4 depends on a working v6 its a lot easier to make sure issues are noticed and fixed in time. This is basically what i'm looking at for our services since I don't like the added complexity of running dualstack everywhere. (two of everything doesn't feel right unless its for redundancy, which it isn't in this case) I've got no idea how to handle this on other services who aren't aware of the situation though. Maybe create new best practices? :) /Oskar Stenman Skickat fr?n min Sony Xperia?-smartphone ---- Geert Jan de Groot skrev ---- > >Hi all, > >Not attending RIPE-meetings myself anymore these days, >I'm not sure whether (just) a IPv6-only network at a meeting >is going to cut it. This has been done for a number of years worth >of meetings and while the results are interesting, I'm not sure that >a RIPE-meeting is a requirement to run these experiments. >It makes perfect sense to run a V6-only network at home/office and >get the experience all year, not just during a meeting. > >So, as a typical home user these days, I run a V6-network, >some pieces of it being V6-only, other places being V6-preferred, >and the experiences are, eumm, mixed. > >I frequently find sites (at various ISP's) that are either partially >or fully broken for V6. In many instances, happy eyeballs rescues things, >that is, things seem just slow but not entirely broken unless one analyzes. > >Reporting a V6-broken website to it's hoster is, in many cases, >a waiste of time. Helpdesks don't understand the problem. >If I'm lucky I get a response. Problems are seldom resolved. >I think I see this five times per month or so. Perhaps I should browse less. > >Thing is, we seem to be working on making the Internet V6-capable, >but currently V6 performance and stability is a serious issue, especially >when it comes to reporting problems. Happy eyeballs mean that >the V6-network can, in many cases, just be switched off without >anybody noticing. We all know of stories of support/helpdesk folk >telling people just to switch off V6. >That's all nice if it'd just be an academic exercise but not if it >is supposed to be the main bread and butter in the years to come. > >So, my question to the WG: does the WG think this is a problem, and >can we think of a way to get clueful v6 complaints to clueful handlers, >instead of being ignored / misaddressed / ...? > >Geert Jan > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bs at stepladder-it.com Tue Jun 3 14:40:44 2014 From: bs at stepladder-it.com (Benedikt Stockebrand) Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 12:40:44 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network (not just at RIPE xx meeting) In-Reply-To: <7j5tskjfoto576vhpyuah0a4.1401657599761@email.android.com> (Oskar Stenman's message of "Sun, 01 Jun 2014 23:26:51 +0200") References: <7j5tskjfoto576vhpyuah0a4.1401657599761@email.android.com> Message-ID: <87tx82p3n7.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Hi Oskar and list, > I guess this is one of the larger issues with running multiple > protocols in parallel :) it is:-) > One solution as a content-provider would be to get the services to be > v6-only, and then implement workarounds (for example stateless nat46, > 4to6 loadbalancers) on the edge to get the service on to v4 Internet. > Most people monitor v4 and if v4 depends on a working v6 its a lot > easier to make sure issues are noticed and fixed in time. Hmm, I doubt that this is a good idea. Of course, it depends on your particular services and their requirements, but here's why I'd rather dual-stack the server (but not the clients): - Running the existing servers dual-stacked is in my experience less pain than messing around with NAT64, proxies or whatever. In other words, dual-stacked servers are likely to be less pain. - If you only monitor the IPv4 side, then you'll get limited information for troubleshooting: You have to check manually if the problem is with the server or the NAT64/proxy/whatever. If you want to keep downtimes at their existing levels, you do need to monitor both the IPv4 and IPv6 sides of the service. - In the long run you'll need IPv6 monitoring anyway, because it is only a matter of time until some services will be provided via IPv6 only. This is likely going to happen faster than people generally expect. (Yes, ask a psychologist/sociologist about this...). That said, I can kind of imagine scenarios where your approach may be useful, it's just that from my subjective experience these aren't the "normal" or "general" case. > This is basically what i'm looking at for our services since I don't > like the added complexity of running dualstack everywhere. (two of > everything doesn't feel right unless its for redundancy, which it isn't > in this case) When it comes to dual-stacking both sides of a client/server setup, I fully agree. However, if we assume the client side to be single stacked (and/or outside our administrative control), then I generally consider dual-stacking the servers the least painful approach. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From silvia.hagen at sunny.ch Wed Jun 4 09:34:07 2014 From: silvia.hagen at sunny.ch (Silvia Hagen) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:34:07 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] Swiss IPv6 Business Conference in Zurich, June 17 - register now! Message-ID: There is an IPv6 conference coming up on June 17, at Arena Sihlcity in Zurich. We have a great lineup of international speakers, over 15 sessions in two tracks (business and technical), great networking opportunities. Find all information and registration at www.ipv6conference.ch This is the third edition of the annual IPv6 conference organized by the Swiss IPv6 Council (www.swissipv6council.ch). See you soon Silvia Hagen Chair Swiss IPv6 Council Swiss IPv6 Council CH-8124 Maur +41 (0)44 887 62 10 www.swissipv6council.ch http://twitter.com/IPv6CouncilCH *********************************** Switzerland is Number 2 in IPv6 User Adoption Gearing up to 20% in 2014! *********************************** Our website is dual-stack - how about yours? *********************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From furry13 at gmail.com Thu Jun 5 10:40:59 2014 From: furry13 at gmail.com (Jen Linkova) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 10:40:59 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [bcop] BCOP presentation at RIPE meeting in Warsaw In-Reply-To: <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> References: <53467548.9050407@go6.si> <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> Message-ID: On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: >> 4) Code 112 (v4 + broken Ipv6) >> >> - can we show the process as a flowchart? if-then-else? > > > that's a bit hard one... do we have anybody specialized in flowcharts here? As soon as we describe the procedure in plain text more clearly, it would be relatively easy to add a flowchart (I could do it). IMHO if we could not draw a flowchart based on the text, it means that troubleshooting steps are not defined clear enough :) So let's concentrate on the defining the procedure and then I'll add a flow chart. > I think this are all good suggestions. We'll go through them during our > authosr edit cycle meeting, probably during the IETF meeting in Toronto. I'd be happy to join. >> IMHO a section should be added which explains what kind of information >> should be collected for an escalation. I'd suggest: >> - Ipv4 and Ipv6 traceroute; >> - ifconfig output >> - routing table output >> - maybe packet capture for the session which is having issues. > > > I think this is asking a bit too much to a first level helpdesk employee... > I don't know... Packet capture might be tricky as the user machine might not have any sniffer installed. However I believe we could expect even first level support engineer to be able to run the well-defined set of commands (such as traceroute, netstat and ifconfig) - they don't need to understand the output, just provide it while escalating. -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry From jim.small at mail.com Fri Jun 6 06:43:08 2014 From: jim.small at mail.com (James Small) Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 00:43:08 -0400 Subject: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 only network (not just at RIPE xx meeting) In-Reply-To: <7j5tskjfoto576vhpyuah0a4.1401657599761@email.android.com> References: <7j5tskjfoto576vhpyuah0a4.1401657599761@email.android.com> Message-ID: <047401cf8141$d0f79ea0$72e6dbe0$@mail.com> > I guess this is one of the larger issues with running multiple protocols in parallel :) > One solution as a content-provider would be to get the services to be v6-only, and then implement > workarounds (for example stateless nat46, 4to6 loadbalancers) on the edge to get the service on to > v4 Internet. Most people monitor v4 and if v4 depends on a working v6 its a lot easier to make sure > issues are noticed and fixed in time. This can work as long as the services are conducive to NAT46 or (preferably) SLB46. Web services behind SLB46 work well for example, Facebook being an excellent example of this approach: http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2014/03/facebooks-extremely-impressive-internal-use-of-ipv6/ --Jim ---- Geert Jan de Groot skrev ---- Hi all, Not attending RIPE-meetings myself anymore these days, I'm not sure whether (just) a IPv6-only network at a meeting is going to cut it. This has been done for a number of years worth of meetings and while the results are interesting, I'm not sure that a RIPE-meeting is a requirement to run these experiments. It makes perfect sense to run a V6-only network at home/office and get the experience all year, not just during a meeting. So, as a typical home user these days, I run a V6-network, some pieces of it being V6-only, other places being V6-preferred, and the experiences are, eumm, mixed. I frequently find sites (at various ISP's) that are either partially or fully broken for V6. In many instances, happy eyeballs rescues things, that is, things seem just slow but not entirely broken unless one analyzes. Reporting a V6-broken website to it's hoster is, in many cases, a waiste of time. Helpdesks don't understand the problem. If I'm lucky I get a response. Problems are seldom resolved. I think I see this five times per month or so. Perhaps I should browse less. Thing is, we seem to be working on making the Internet V6-capable, but currently V6 performance and stability is a serious issue, especially when it comes to reporting problems. Happy eyeballs mean that the V6-network can, in many cases, just be switched off without anybody noticing. We all know of stories of support/helpdesk folk telling people just to switch off V6. That's all nice if it'd just be an academic exercise but not if it is supposed to be the main bread and butter in the years to come. So, my question to the WG: does the WG think this is a problem, and can we think of a way to get clueful v6 complaints to clueful handlers, instead of being ignored / misaddressed / ...? Geert Jan From jan at go6.si Tue Jun 10 08:57:26 2014 From: jan at go6.si (Jan Zorz @ go6.si) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:26 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [bcop] BCOP presentation at RIPE meeting in Warsaw In-Reply-To: References: <53467548.9050407@go6.si> <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> Message-ID: <5396AC56.3030909@go6.si> On 05/06/14 10:40, Jen Linkova wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote: >>> 4) Code 112 (v4 + broken Ipv6) >>> >>> - can we show the process as a flowchart? if-then-else? >> >> >> that's a bit hard one... do we have anybody specialized in flowcharts here? > > As soon as we describe the procedure in plain text more clearly, it > would be relatively easy > to add a flowchart (I could do it). So we need to address all the comments first and make the text more clear before moving forward with the flowchart? > IMHO if we could not draw a > flowchart based on the text, it means that > troubleshooting steps are not defined clear enough :) > So let's concentrate on the defining the procedure and then I'll add a > flow chart. thnx! > >> I think this are all good suggestions. We'll go through them during our >> authosr edit cycle meeting, probably during the IETF meeting in Toronto. > > I'd be happy to join. ok, count yourself in ;) > >>> IMHO a section should be added which explains what kind of information >>> should be collected for an escalation. I'd suggest: >>> - Ipv4 and Ipv6 traceroute; >>> - ifconfig output >>> - routing table output >>> - maybe packet capture for the session which is having issues. >> >> >> I think this is asking a bit too much to a first level helpdesk employee... >> I don't know... > > Packet capture might be tricky as the user machine might not have any > sniffer installed. > However I believe we could expect even first level support engineer to > be able to run > the well-defined set of commands (such as traceroute, netstat and > ifconfig) - they don't need to > understand the output, just provide it while escalating. > What do others think here? What is your experience with helpdesks and their ability to perform this stuff? Cheers, Jan From bs at stepladder-it.com Tue Jun 10 14:11:25 2014 From: bs at stepladder-it.com (Benedikt Stockebrand) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 12:11:25 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [bcop] BCOP presentation at RIPE meeting in Warsaw In-Reply-To: <5396AC56.3030909@go6.si> (Jan Zorz's message of "Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:26 +0200") References: <53467548.9050407@go6.si> <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> <5396AC56.3030909@go6.si> Message-ID: <87sindezgy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Hi Jan and lists, "Jan Zorz @ go6.si" writes: > On 05/06/14 10:40, Jen Linkova wrote: >>> I think this is asking a bit too much to a first level helpdesk employee... >>> I don't know... >> >> Packet capture might be tricky as the user machine might not have any >> sniffer installed. >> However I believe we could expect even first level support engineer to >> be able to run >> the well-defined set of commands (such as traceroute, netstat and >> ifconfig) - they don't need to >> understand the output, just provide it while escalating. >> > > What do others think here? What is your experience with helpdesks and > their ability to perform this stuff? that really depends. I've seen first level supporters who wouldn't need this at such a level because they'd know how to do that anyway, and I've seen ones who would read whatever a flowchart says without understanding a single word. But what's worrying me more is if we can actually come up with a one-size-fits-all flowchart that is actually any use to anybody. It might well be that this turns out a completely futile exercise, but the only way to find that out is to actually give it a try. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From furry13 at gmail.com Tue Jun 10 16:50:36 2014 From: furry13 at gmail.com (Jen Linkova) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:50:36 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [bcop] BCOP presentation at RIPE meeting in Warsaw In-Reply-To: <87sindezgy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> References: <53467548.9050407@go6.si> <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> <5396AC56.3030909@go6.si> <87sindezgy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote:. >>> However I believe we could expect even first level support engineer to >>> be able to run >>> the well-defined set of commands (such as traceroute, netstat and >>> ifconfig) - they don't need to >>> understand the output, just provide it while escalating. >>> >> >> What do others think here? What is your experience with helpdesks and >> their ability to perform this stuff? > > that really depends. I've seen first level supporters who wouldn't need > this at such a level because they'd know how to do that anyway My understanding they are not a target audience of this document ;) >and I've > seen ones who would read whatever a flowchart says without understanding > a single word. That's why I'd like to make sure that the troubleshooting procedure in this document could be presented as a flow chart and all possible scenarios are covered (even as 'then escalate'), so first-level support always know what to do. Re: collecting additional information: my point here is that when X-level support is escalating to X+1 level, it's always a good idea to have a well-defined list of what information should be collected and provided with an escalation request (like attaching 'show tech' to Cisco TAC request :)) It does not mean that escalating engineer has to understand every single word in the data they are collecting and it does not mean that the collected information would necessary contain everything needed to solve the case. The goal is to cover some common cases (and if somebody would complain to me about poor v[46] connectivity from their workstation I personally would ask for ifconfig, netstat and traceroute before doing anything else ;) > > But what's worrying me more is if we can actually come up with a > one-size-fits-all flowchart that is actually any use to anybody. I'm sure we can not do 'one-size-fits-all' thing but we could provide a kind of template which could be customized. >It might well be that this turns out a completely futile exercise, but the > only way to find that out is to actually give it a try. I agree. If I remember correctly, Ragnar mentioned during v6 WG session that his helpdesk was pretty happy with this document. So I believe we should get the draft to a slightly better state and let people try it in their networks. -- SY, Jen Linkova aka Furry From bs at stepladder-it.com Tue Jun 10 21:52:43 2014 From: bs at stepladder-it.com (Benedikt Stockebrand) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 19:52:43 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [bcop] BCOP presentation at RIPE meeting in Warsaw In-Reply-To: (Jen Linkova's message of "Tue, 10 Jun 2014 16:50:36 +0200") References: <53467548.9050407@go6.si> <537DC4DD.5020907@go6.si> <5396AC56.3030909@go6.si> <87sindezgy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Message-ID: <87k38otud0.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Hi Jen and list, Jen Linkova writes: >> that really depends. I've seen first level supporters who wouldn't need >> this at such a level because they'd know how to do that anyway > > My understanding they are not a target audience of this document ;) right---but they might still feel offended because they think we think they are idiots:-) >> But what's worrying me more is if we can actually come up with a >> one-size-fits-all flowchart that is actually any use to anybody. > > I'm sure we can not do 'one-size-fits-all' thing but we could provide > a kind of template which could be customized. Fair enough, only then we should make absolutely that this is clearly stated in a prominent way. >>It might well be that this turns out a completely futile exercise, but the >> only way to find that out is to actually give it a try. > > I agree. If I remember correctly, Ragnar mentioned during v6 WG > session that his helpdesk > was pretty happy with this document. So I believe we should get the > draft to a slightly better state and > let people try it in their networks. Well, forget about Ragnar's crowd. They are actually doing Gigabit fiber to people's homes in some remote corner of Norway while Deutsche Telekom and their resellers only gets me 10 Mbit/s DSL downstream in downtown Frankfurt; I consider that pretty strong indication that their first level support is about two orders of magnitude better than the international average as well:-) Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From mir at ripe.net Fri Jun 20 15:05:32 2014 From: mir at ripe.net (Mirjam Kuehne) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 15:05:32 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: The IPv6 Analyser In-Reply-To: <53A43181.5090108@ripe.net> References: <53A43181.5090108@ripe.net> Message-ID: <53A4319C.4030300@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, The IPv6 Analyser is a toolset that offers our members a visual insight into all the allocations, aggregations and assignments they have made. This toolset seamlessly integrates with the RIPE Database, allowing you to create new objects with an easy-to-use wizard. It was announced before the RIPE 68 meeting, and we're now seeing LIRs starting to use it. Please find some more details in this RIPE Labs article: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/AlexBand/the-ipv6-analyser Please let us know if you have any comments or questions. Kind regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Fri Jun 20 17:33:18 2014 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 17:33:18 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" Message-ID: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Dear WG-folks, out of curiosity and because I got asked this question, here we go: Is the use of "0" as the interface ID in an IPv6 network "clean"? I haven't found any indication that "0" is reserved (as in IPv4), or should not be used, but there's a lingering feeling that it may cause trouble, somewhere, somehow. Any input appreciated, tia, Wilfried. From ayourtch at gmail.com Fri Jun 20 19:54:22 2014 From: ayourtch at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmV3IPCfkb0gIFlvdXJ0Y2hlbmtv?=) Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:54:22 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" In-Reply-To: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> References: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Message-ID: On 6/20/14, Wilfried Woeber wrote: > Dear WG-folks, > > out of curiosity and because I got asked this question, here we go: > > Is the use of "0" as the interface ID in an IPv6 network "clean"? > I haven't found any indication that "0" is reserved (as in IPv4), or > should not be used, but there's a lingering feeling that it may cause > trouble, somewhere, somehow. Using all-zero IID forms a subnet-router anycast address: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.6.1 Also, I've read about linux hosts responding to fe80:: if it is configured on any link on the router (though reads like a clear bug to me, and maybe fixed already). --a > > Any input appreciated, tia, > Wilfried. > > From bs at stepladder-it.com Sat Jun 21 16:09:37 2014 From: bs at stepladder-it.com (Benedikt Stockebrand) Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2014 14:09:37 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" In-Reply-To: ("Andrew =?utf-8?Q?=F0=9F=91=BD=2E?= Yourtchenko"'s message of "Fri, 20 Jun 2014 19:54:22 +0200") References: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Message-ID: <87egyiwdzy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Hi folks, Andrew ? Yourtchenko writes: > Using all-zero IID forms a subnet-router anycast address: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.6.1 > > Also, I've read about linux hosts responding to fe80:: if it is > configured on any link on the router (though reads like a clear bug to > me, and maybe fixed already). well, any router is supposed to listen on that anycast address, so enabling that address when you turn on IPv6 forwarding does make some sense. Cheers, Benedikt -- Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From ayourtch at gmail.com Sun Jun 22 15:31:38 2014 From: ayourtch at gmail.com (Andrew Yourtchenko) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:31:38 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" In-Reply-To: <87egyiwdzy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> References: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> <87egyiwdzy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Message-ID: > On 21 Jun 2014, at 16:09, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Andrew ? Yourtchenko writes: > >> Using all-zero IID forms a subnet-router anycast address: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.6.1 >> >> Also, I've read about linux hosts responding to fe80:: if it is >> configured on any link on the router (though reads like a clear bug to >> me, and maybe fixed already). > > well, any router is supposed to listen on that anycast address, so > enabling that address when you turn on IPv6 forwarding does make some > sense. My sentence was about linux box not being a host.. But now that you mention it - sounds plausible that the folks I heard it from had linux host doing forwarding and forgot about it - makes sense indeed then and of course not a bug. --a > > > Cheers, > > Benedikt > > -- > Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting > Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ > > Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects > > BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From Henrik.Lans at get.no Mon Jun 23 12:52:18 2014 From: Henrik.Lans at get.no (Lans, Henrik Ove) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:52:18 +0000 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" In-Reply-To: References: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> <87egyiwdzy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> Message-ID: <0071BC7CCE69D34CB4C54E454D5FF1DC610CFAAA@Exch01.getaccess.no> Hi, RFC 4291 does define all-zeros interface ID addresses as a router-anycast address and while it's not explicitly prohibited to use it as an interface ID address, it is strongly discouraged. (This also carries over into other RFCs and BCP documents.) The only case I know of that clearly advocates (even mandates) the use of all-zeros interface ID addresses is RFC 6164 about using /127 networks on point-to-point links where supported. Apart from point-to-point links I tend to stay away from all-zeros addresses in order to comply with as many IPv6 RFCs as possible. ;-) // H -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:ipv6-wg-bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Andrew Yourtchenko Sent: 22. juni 2014 15:32 To: Benedikt Stockebrand Cc: Woeber at cc.univie.ac.at; ipv6-wg at ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" > On 21 Jun 2014, at 16:09, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > > Hi folks, > > Andrew ? Yourtchenko writes: > >> Using all-zero IID forms a subnet-router anycast address: >> >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.6.1 >> >> Also, I've read about linux hosts responding to fe80:: if it is >> configured on any link on the router (though reads like a clear bug to >> me, and maybe fixed already). > > well, any router is supposed to listen on that anycast address, so > enabling that address when you turn on IPv6 forwarding does make some > sense. My sentence was about linux box not being a host.. But now that you mention it - sounds plausible that the folks I heard it from had linux host doing forwarding and forgot about it - makes sense indeed then and of course not a bug. --a > > > Cheers, > > Benedikt > > -- > Benedikt Stockebrand, Stepladder IT Training+Consulting > Dipl.-Inform. http://www.stepladder-it.com/ > > Business Grade IPv6 --- Consulting, Training, Projects > > BIVBlog---Benedikt's IT Video Blog: http://www.stepladder-it.com/bivblog/ From training at ripe.net Tue Jun 24 10:56:42 2014 From: training at ripe.net (Training Services) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:56:42 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] [training] RIPE NCC Webinars - new dates Message-ID: <53A93D4A.2080909@ripe.net> Dear colleagues, We are pleased to announce the launch of new dates for our Webinars. The RIPE NCC Webinars are live and take only one hour. You can interact with our trainers without leaving your desk. We focus on the topics and issues most important for LIRs. Register now at https://www.ripe.net/lir-services/training/e-learning/webinars Participation is limited to 20 people, so don't hesitate if you want to take part! If you have questions, please email . We look forward to seeing you online. Kind regards, RIPE NCC Training Services From Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at Fri Jun 27 12:40:08 2014 From: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at (Wilfried Woeber) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 12:40:08 +0200 Subject: [ipv6-wg] is use of IF-ID 0 "clean" In-Reply-To: <0071BC7CCE69D34CB4C54E454D5FF1DC610CFAAA@Exch01.getaccess.no> References: <53A4543E.9030800@CC.UniVie.ac.at> <87egyiwdzy.fsf@stepladder-it.com> <0071BC7CCE69D34CB4C54E454D5FF1DC610CFAAA@Exch01.getaccess.no> Message-ID: <53AD4A08.7080801@CC.UniVie.ac.at> Thanks to all of you who provided input and feeback! Wilfried.