[arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6

Wed Feb 27 16:24:01 EST 2013

Yes, there is ULA. However, there's no need for RFC-1918 in IPv6 and no need for NAT,
so I'm even more disappointed that a double CCIE couldn't just use the doc prefix
(both IPv4 and IPv6) as  intended and skip the whole ambiguous addressing problem
altogether.

Owen

On Feb 27, 2013, at 12:47 PM, "Paul G. Timmins" <ptimmins at clearrate.com> wrote:

> I'm disappointed that a dual CCIE is saying there's no RFC-1918 equivalent.
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4193
> 
> Paul Timmins
> Clear Rate Communications
> Direct: (248) 556-4532
> Customer Support: (877) 877-4799
> 24 Hour Repair: (866) 366-4665
> Network Operations: (877) 877-1250
> www.clearrate.com
> 
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] on behalf of GMail Account [ccie18532 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 2:37 PM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
> 
> Good afternoon:
> 
> Attached is a configuration that I have used with cisco routers.  The key to
> start the IPv6 in BGP is to turn-off "bgp default ipv4-unicast".  Now when
> you do that the BGP session becomes dual stacked IPv4 and IPv6.  I have also
> added an interface command.  In cisco you can have multiple IPv6 addresses
> and do not need the "secondary" command as you do with IPv4.  This was an
> IOS 12.4 configuration, but IOS 15 ain't much different.
> 
> Don't panic IPv6 is very easy once you use notepad to build your
> configuration. There are no RFC 1918's so I made my own with 10::, easy to
> understand and I won't announce it anyway.  Now cisco has been slow in
> offering NAT-66 and NAT-64, but others are doing NAT-44, NAT-46, NAT-64, and
> NAT-66, (Arista, F5, etc.).
> 
> router bgp 12345
> no bgp fast-external-fallover
> no bgp default ipv4-unicast
> bgp log-neighbor-changes
> neighbor 1:1::2 remote-as 1
> neighbor 1:1::2 description *** Fist ISP IPv6 ***
> neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote-as 1
> neighbor 1.1.1.1 description *** Fist ISP IPv4 ***
> neighbor 2.2.2.2 remote-as 2
> neighbor 2.2.2.2 description *** Second ISP IPv4 ***
> neighbor 3:3::3 remote-as 3
> neighbor 3:3::3 description *** Third ISP IPv6 ***
> neighbor 3.3.3.3 remote-as 3
> neighbor 3.3.3.3 description *** Third ISP IPv4 ***
> !
> address-family ipv4
>  neighbor 1.1.1.1 activate
>  neighbor 1.1.1.1 soft-reconfiguration inbound
>  neighbor 2.2.2.2 activate
>  neighbor 2.2.2.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
>  neighbor 3.3.3.3 activate
>  neighbor 3.3.3.3 soft-reconfiguration inbound
>  no auto-summary
>  no synchronization
>  network 11.11.11.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 12.12.12.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 21.21.21.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 22.22.22.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 31.31.31.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 32.32.32.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>  network 222.33.0.0
> exit-address-family
> !
> address-family ipv6
>  neighbor 1:1::2 activate
>  neighbor 1:1::2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
>  neighbor 1:1::2 prefix-list IPv6 in
>  neighbor 3:3::3 soft-reconfiguration inbound
>  network 12:12::/32
>  network 31:31::/32
>  exit-address-family
> !
> interface G0/0
> description Gateway for Servers and Network Services
> ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> ip address 22.22.22.1 255.255.240.0
> ip verify unicast source reachable-via rx allow-default 199
> no ip redirects
> no ip unreachables
> no ip proxy-arp
> ipv6 address 20::1/48
> ipv6 address 40::1/48
> ipv6 enable
> no ipv6 unreachables
> no ipv6 redirects
> ipv6 verify unicast reverse-path RFC-2827
> end
> !
> access-list 199 remark *** Verify Reverse Path ***
> access-list 199 deny   ip any any log
> !
> ipv6 access-list RFC-2827
> deny ipv6 any any log
> 
> 
> George Morton, Ph. D.
> Principal Network Architect
> Enabling the Smart Network
> Dual CCIE 18532, Router/Switch & Security
> 954-802-1347 Cell
> 954-839-8486 Remote Office
> 202-787-3988 DC Office
> 
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or
> privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use
> of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all
> computers.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net]
> On Behalf Of John Von Essen
> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 1:52 PM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Implementing IPv6
> 
> 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.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.