[arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
Basil Harriott
harriott_200 at hotmail.com
Wed Feb 27 14:38:10 EST 2013
We know it is not a matter of crying wolf on false asumptions becasue as it is now we know that the wolf eventually will come, this is really a preemption of the wolf's coming so that we can be prepared for it.
There need to be forceful policies that will enhance the integration of v4 and v6 and well as a full migration to v6. We need to engage in intensive research that will provide an environment where the two can co-exist without conflicts, without compatibility, user and security issues.
We cannot let the coming catch us unprepared because it definitely is coming.
Regards,
Basil Harriott
"You don't need wings to fly"
From: paul at redbarn.org
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:23:10 -0800
To: msalim at localweb.com; Jawaid.Bazyar at foreThought.net; arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
Its going to be a bit of a mess if folks wait for the sky to fall before planning and executing their v6 migration.
Also if more folks would get it done then the transition and translation costs for those coming in after v4 is gone will be lower.
There is and had been every reason to expedite, so, nothing that's happened so far should be thought of as crying wolf.
Paul
"Mike A. Salim" <msalim at localweb.com> wrote:
Is IPv4 space "really" running out any time soon? Since "wolf" was cried almost two years ago and the sky didn't fall yet, I do not see an immediate mass rush to IPv6 coming yet.
As for simple / stupid checklists, these abound.
I googled for IPv6 checklists and found:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc786337(v=ws.10).aspx
http://www.es.net/services/ipv6-network/ipv6-implementation-checklist/
http://www.infoworld.com/d/data-explosion/your-handy-ipv6-checklist-232
There is probably no "one size fits all" checklist. For example, how much practical attention is
being
paid to IPv6 security at this point? Zero to none as far as I can tell. I am having a hard time finding any commercial or open source IPv6 monitoring tools that will just tell me if my http is alive over IPv6, let alone IPv6 specific security tools.
Mike
A. Michael Salim
VP and Chief Technology Officer,
American Data Technology, Inc.
PO Box 12892
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
P: (919)544-4101 x101
F: (919)544-5345
E: msalim at localweb.com
W: http://www.localweb.com
PRIVACY NOTIFICATION: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). It may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. Unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender
by
reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
-----Original Message-----
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Jawaid Bazyar
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:03 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
What is really needed is simple cookbooks for ISPs and business networks
- step by step checklist of everything you need to do to fully enable and support IPv6.
We have implemented IPv6 and successfully tested it directly. What we don't have is clear methodology around IPv4 to v6 gateways and vice-versa.
Make it stupid easy to implement and it will get done.
On 02/27/2013 09:40 AM, Tim St. Pierre wrote:
So how do we make it "The end of the Freakin' IPv4 World" so people
will actually do this already.
I talk to access ISPs about it all the time, and the usual response is
"well, we're working on it, but it's years away. It isn't really a
priority right now." I think if we set a deadline, like "World Turn
off IPv4 day", then we will actually see some traction.
-Tim
On 13-02-27 10:52 AM, Adrian Goins wrote:
I was sucked into the Cogent/HE problems during World IPv6 day v1 and
v2. It ultimately affected one of my clients deciding to keep IPv6 up
for their infrastructure - they saw that split in reachability as bad
for their customers, since customers using HE as a tunnel broker
would think that the client was the problem, not peering. For most
users of the Internet
discussions about peering have no value.
I agree with the statement about multihoming being the solution. If
you can't afford to multihome, see about getting your connectivity
from a provider who _is_ multihomed. It puts you a couple hops away
from the backbone, but it may be worth it to route around this issue.
You might even be able to find someone in your datacenter who can
throw a cross-connect to your cage and push you out to L3 or ATT or
someone other than Cogent.
We're up with IPv6 transit from Cogent and L3, using our own /32. I
have the opportunity to get transit directly from HE, and I'm
considering doing so as well. I think that the whole squabble is bad
for the Internet and terrible for IPv6 adoption as a whole, but it's
almost worth it for me to pay for the extra handoff to not be drawn
into it any more than I have to be.
What I'm waiting for is IPv6 to the real end
users.
If TWC or Comcast
or Vz would reliably roll out IPv6 across their customer networks, it
would make life much easier. One of our providers at our EU office
was kind enough to enable IPv6 on our wireless link, but when I asked
them about giving me a /64 or /48, they were stupefied. It hadn't
occurred to them that we actually need to have an IP block in order
to make use of it.
I think we're still a long way off from where we should be for
awareness and adoption, and, like most things business humans do,
until it's actually the end of the freakin' IPv4 world, no one is
going to make a move.
Adrian Goins
agoins at arces.net <mailto:agoins at arces.net>
On Feb 22, 2013, at 3:37 PM, Kerry L. Kriegel <kkriegel at cyberlynk.net
<mailto:kkriegel at cyberlynk.net>> wrote:
We only broadcast our data center /32. Cogent is the only provider
we have doing IPv6 at the moment.
AT&T says they do it, but getting it implemented across our peering
link has been in process for several months.
TWTC has the request, and may be online within the week.
TWC -- no way.
Cogent – online.
Level3 – online in about 45 days.
Thank you,
*Kerry L. Kriegel*
Network Operations Engineer
Cyberlynk Network, Inc.
Office: 414-858-9335
Fax: 414-858-9336
*From:*Michael Wallace [mailto:michael at birdhosting.com
<http://birdhosting.com>] *Sent:*Friday, February 22, 2013 10:53 AM
*To:*Kerry L. Kriegel; arin-discuss at arin.net
<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net>
*Subject:*re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
There are plenty of providers out there that do IPv6. We are
currently terminating to a
bunch
of them. Abovenet, Level3, HE, etc
etc. Are you broadcasting the BGP for these?
Thanks,
Michael Wallace
Bird Hosting
----
*From*: "Kerry L. Kriegel" <kkriegel at cyberlynk.net
<mailto:kkriegel at cyberlynk.net>>
*Sent*: Friday, February 22, 2013 8:48 AM *To*:arin-discuss at arin.net
<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net>
*Subject*: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
We received our /32 IPv6 block from ARIN awhile back but before we
could do anything with it we needed to do some hardware / IOS
upgrades on our backbone. We got enough of that finished last week
that we decided to “roll out” IPv6 and see how things looked.
After a couple days of trouble shooting why none of the engineers in
our data center could reach their Hurricane Electric Tunnel networks
at home (and vice versa), I stopped looking at our backbone and
started looking a
t
Google.
It appears that the squabble started in 2009 between Cogent and HE
is still in progress. I was wondering if anyone on this list had any
“inside” information about the problem and whether or not there was
an end in sight. It seems to me that having a disconnect between two
major players is going to hinder IPv6 adaptation.
Thank you,
*Kerry L. Kriegel*
Network Operations Engineer
Cyberlynk Network, Inc.
Office: 414-858-9335
Fax: 414-858-9336
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the
ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net
<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contactinfo at arin.net if you experience any issues.
--
--
Tim St. Pierre
System Operator
Communicate Freely
289 225 1220 x5101
tim at communicatefreely.net
www.communicatefreely.net
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20130227/108ba2b9/attachment.html>
More information about the ARIN-discuss
mailing list