[arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6

Wed Feb 27 14:15:11 EST 2013

John,

You just ignored what I said. An ISP implementing pure IPv6 is the easy 
part. The hard part is supporting the hundreds of millions of non-IPv6 
devices.  Implementing requires knowledge and process for handling that. 
Your typical IT guy is going to need help with it.

On 02/27/2013 11:51 AM, John Von Essen wrote:
> I dont know why this thread keeps going. IPv6 implementation is SO easy.
>
> Step 1: Call your BGP peers and ask them to give you dual-stack 
> IPv4/IPv6 and setup an IPv6 BGP session.
> Step 2: Configure the WAN link on your routers with dual-stack 
> IPv4/IPv6 and assign the IPv6 address given to you by your BGP peers.
> Step 3: Add the BGP session info for v6
> Step 4: Add your v6 advertisements
> Step 5: Your DONE
>
> I have Cogent, Level3, and Abovenet peers. It literally took 1-2 days 
> to get completely setup with IPv6, I just emailed them, requested 
> dual-stack, got my v6 address, brought up the peer's BGP session for 
> v6, and boom I was done.
>
> As for the people who are behind Cogent alone and have some issues 
> with HE, ummm.... how can you be a recent Arin member with IP 
> resources and NOT be multi-homed? If you're legitimately an end-user 
> network, thats fine, but why run BGP over a single-homed link? Just do 
> a static route to your single ISP and let your ISP announce your 
> block, and since your ISP is multi-homed the HE thing is not an issue.
>
>
> Lets not confuse implementation and adoption. v6 is extremely easy to 
> implement, adoption is a different story. I've been native v6 for over 
> 2 years, and of my 300+ datacenter customers - alone one is using v6 - 
> the rest are oblivious.
>
> -John
>
>
>
> On Feb 27, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Jawaid Bazyar wrote:
>
>> 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 at 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.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Jawaid Bazyar
>>
>> President
>>
>> ph 303.815.1814
>>
>> fax 303.815.1001
>>
>> Jawaid.Bazyar at foreThought.net <email:Jawaid.Bazyar at foreThought.net>
>>     <http://www.foreThought.net>
>> Note our new address: 2347 Curtis St, Denver CO 80205
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

-- 

Jawaid Bazyar

President

ph 303.815.1814

fax 303.815.1001

Jawaid.Bazyar at foreThought.net <email:Jawaid.Bazyar at foreThought.net>
	<http://www.foreThought.net>
Note our new address: 2347 Curtis St, Denver CO 80205