is anybody at the APE equipped to do IPv6 peering? Private replies are fine, I'll summarise if there's interest (and if there are replies).
It would perhaps be interesting to setup a v6 over v4 tunnel endpoint at
the APE, for those of us that don't peer directly.
Chris Hellburg set one up in Wellington, but I believe its been offline in
recent months.
On Sun, 25 May 2003 22:00:15 -0400, Joe Abley
is anybody at the APE equipped to do IPv6 peering?
Private replies are fine, I'll summarise if there's interest (and if there are replies).
_______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Nathan Ward Esphion Ltd.
On Sunday, May 25, 2003, at 22:50 Canada/Eastern, Nathan Ward wrote:
It would perhaps be interesting to setup a v6 over v4 tunnel endpoint at the APE, for those of us that don't peer directly.
Chris Hellburg set one up in Wellington, but I believe its been offline in recent months.
Was it used, much? Is anybody here sinking any v6 traffic?
AFAIK it was more a geek project, but it proved a useful learning tool for myself. There was a tunnel established to ISI from soa.co.nz IIRC. We mainly (all?) had private ASN's and free IPv6 address space and tunnels from freenet6.net.
From my investigation of the "MetaNet" (http://www.wlug.org.nz/MetaNet), I notice they talk about IPv6 a little, but I don't see any mention of it being in use at present.
On Sun, 25 May 2003 23:01:27 -0400, Joe Abley
On Sunday, May 25, 2003, at 22:50 Canada/Eastern, Nathan Ward wrote:
It would perhaps be interesting to setup a v6 over v4 tunnel endpoint at the APE, for those of us that don't peer directly.
Chris Hellburg set one up in Wellington, but I believe its been offline in recent months.
Was it used, much? Is anybody here sinking any v6 traffic?
-- Nathan Ward Esphion Ltd.
I don't think anyone is doing any serious ipv6 in NZ at the moment for one simple reason: There's no demand for it. With no demand it's very hard to justify the time/expense towards "playing around" with ipv6. Hopefully this situation will change in the future. Tim
No demand for it because noone is using it.
Noone uses v6 until someone else is.
Noone used the Internet until someone else did either..
We've heard it all before..
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to put up my time etc. to try and
help seed the usage of v6.
If nothing else comes from it, it'd be nice to be one of the few in the
know when/if v6 does /eventually/ come around.
On Mon, 26 May 2003 16:26:45 +1200 (NZST), TiM
I don't think anyone is doing any serious ipv6 in NZ at the moment for one simple reason: There's no demand for it.
With no demand it's very hard to justify the time/expense towards "playing around" with ipv6.
Hopefully this situation will change in the future.
Tim
-- Nathan Ward Esphion Ltd.
At 17:20 26/05/03 +1200, Nathan Ward wrote:
No demand for it because noone is using it. Noone uses v6 until someone else is. Noone used the Internet until someone else did either.. We've heard it all before..
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to put up my time etc. to try and help seed the usage of v6.
If nothing else comes from it, it'd be nice to be one of the few in the know when/if v6 does /eventually/ come around.
The problem I can see with the introduction of ipv6 is that its such a fundamental change, a bit like converting an entire country from imperial to metric, except that you're trying to convert the WHOLE world :) Another analogy would be in trying to convert the entire world from the 60 second / 24 hour time system to "metric time". (Where there are 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour etc - don't laugh, somebody tried in the 70's :) Most of the things that have devloped on the internet have involved stepping stones that gave some measure of backward compatibility or transition phase until the old stuff was well and truly obsolete, but for something as fundamental as ip addresses its a big jump no matter what you do.... :/ Just think about all the legacy software that doesn't and never will work with ipv6 addressing too...(Win95 anyone ? :) Regards, Simon
On Mon, 26 May 2003 17:43:08 +1200, Simon Byrnand
Most of the things that have devloped on the internet have involved stepping stones that gave some measure of backward compatibility or transition phase until the old stuff was well and truly obsolete, but for something as fundamental as ip addresses its a big jump no matter what you do.... :/ Just think about all the legacy software that doesn't and never will work with ipv6 addressing too...(Win95 anyone ? :)
There are v4 to v6 gateways, and v6 to v4 gateways. Windows 95 users can install Trumpet Winsock 5.0. http://www.trumpet.com.au/ipv6.htm (That comment started out as a joke referencing the joys of Winsock on Windows 3.1, scarily it turned into a truth) A quick google consultation also renders: "RFC3089: A SOCKS-based IPv6/IPv4 Gateway Mechanism" http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3089.html
InternetNZ will propose an IPv6 task Force within the next four months. We will provide infrastructure and admin. support. Looking forward to the NOG providing the IPV6TF with brain power and knowledge. IPV6 is inevitable, but who knows when it will become dominant, as the last flag day was the last flag day. Simon Byrnand wrote:
At 17:20 26/05/03 +1200, Nathan Ward wrote:
No demand for it because noone is using it. Noone uses v6 until someone else is. Noone used the Internet until someone else did either.. We've heard it all before..
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to put up my time etc. to try and help seed the usage of v6.
If nothing else comes from it, it'd be nice to be one of the few in the know when/if v6 does /eventually/ come around.
The problem I can see with the introduction of ipv6 is that its such a fundamental change, a bit like converting an entire country from imperial to metric, except that you're trying to convert the WHOLE world :)
Another analogy would be in trying to convert the entire world from the 60 second / 24 hour time system to "metric time". (Where there are 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour etc - don't laugh, somebody tried in the 70's :)
Most of the things that have devloped on the internet have involved stepping stones that gave some measure of backward compatibility or transition phase until the old stuff was well and truly obsolete, but for something as fundamental as ip addresses its a big jump no matter what you do.... :/ Just think about all the legacy software that doesn't and never will work with ipv6 addressing too...(Win95 anyone ? :)
Regards, Simon
_______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Peter Macaulay Executive Director InternetNZ Direct +64 4 495 2113
Someone in the IETF once made the statement that "IPv6 was somehwat like a Nuclear Weapon, hope we never have to use it, but nice to know it's there just in case". Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks. Are you seeing a real world move in America/Canada yet Joe ? Arron Scott -----Original Message----- From: Peter Macaulay [mailto:exedir(a)internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Monday, 26 May 2003 6:31 p.m. Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 at APE InternetNZ will propose an IPv6 task Force within the next four months. We will provide infrastructure and admin. support. Looking forward to the NOG providing the IPV6TF with brain power and knowledge. IPV6 is inevitable, but who knows when it will become dominant, as the last flag day was the last flag day. Simon Byrnand wrote:
At 17:20 26/05/03 +1200, Nathan Ward wrote:
No demand for it because noone is using it. Noone uses v6 until someone else is. Noone used the Internet until someone else did either.. We've heard it all before..
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to put up my time etc. to try and help seed the usage of v6.
If nothing else comes from it, it'd be nice to be one of the few in the know when/if v6 does /eventually/ come around.
The problem I can see with the introduction of ipv6 is that its such a fundamental change, a bit like converting an entire country from imperial to metric, except that you're trying to convert the WHOLE world :)
Another analogy would be in trying to convert the entire world from the 60 second / 24 hour time system to "metric time". (Where there are
100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour etc - don't laugh, somebody tried in the 70's :)
Most of the things that have devloped on the internet have involved stepping stones that gave some measure of backward compatibility or transition phase until the old stuff was well and truly obsolete, but for something as fundamental as ip addresses its a big jump no matter what you do.... :/ Just think about all the legacy software that doesn't and never will work with ipv6 addressing too...(Win95 anyone ? :)
Regards, Simon
_______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Peter Macaulay Executive Director InternetNZ Direct +64 4 495 2113 _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
NTTDoCoMo are using IPV6 across there broadband handset trials. I think they really want to lead the way for V6 in the mobile market space. A lot like they did with early GPRS. There is a good article about on Slashdot once regarding NTTDoCoMo and its V6 handsets. If I find it ill post it. -----Original Message----- Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks. Are you seeing a real world move in America/Canada yet Joe ? Arron Scott <Snip Snip>
On Monday, May 26, 2003, at 17:31 Canada/Eastern, Arron Scott wrote:
Someone in the IETF once made the statement that "IPv6 was somehwat like a Nuclear Weapon, hope we never have to use it, but nice to know it's there just in case".
Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks.
Are you seeing a real world move in America/Canada yet Joe ?
There are large operators running native v6 networks in Europe and the US, and more in east Asia. We are deploying (and have deployed) v6 infrastructure at ISC. You can decide whether we are "real world" or not :-) One interesting aspect which seems to rarely get a mention is that most operating systems used by people today support v6, either out-of-the-box or with minor tweaking. When I arrived at the IETF meeting in San Francisco earlier this year and the DHCP servers were down, I didn't actually notice; my powerbook (with attendant fruity consumer-grade operating system) autoconfigured itself with a v6 address, it turned out that everything I wanted to do was possible without v4 transport, and without any 6-to-4 gateways (IMAP, SMTP, ssh). So maybe the wait for v6 is not about waiting for a demand from users, since when it's available users will start using it without even realising; maybe it's because the problems that v6 was designed to solve are not particularly pressing right now. Or alternatively, maybe v6 still has the aura of "future, experimental, maybe one day, complicated, scary" about it, and people don't realise that the infrastructure is really already in place, to a large extent, and all they have to do is turn it on. I remember jumping through hoops, gathering documentation for historical allocations out of 203.97.0.0/17. I also remember the annoyance of address assignment, ad-hoc classless in-addr.arpa delegation, shouting at sales people for promising "5 class Cs" with their 64k office internet connections, and being shouted at by sales people for holding up deals because appropriate pedantic address utilisation forms had not been filled in correctly. It would certainly have been nice to be able to sidestep all that and say "yes, here is your /48, please move along now". Joe
(I am not affiliated with any of the companies mentioned in this e-mail) Could companies like Vodafone , Walker Wireless and so forth implement IPV6 on their wireless networks (so all devices have a unique address), and then have a v4 - v6 gateway for data that needs to be moved back and forth across to the traditional internet.. In the case of City Link in Wellington - or even if there is a roll out of a similar structure in Auckland - would it not be worth the companies while to start using IPV6 - future proofing the network, and also providing the "benefits" that using IPV6 would provide - IPSec and all that.. With the "sudden growth" in wireless demand and Fridges, Cars and almost everything else you can think of becoming IP aware, isn't the switch to IPV6 like switching from Black & White television to Color? Those who want to keep their B&W going - (Nanna Vision) then go ahead, those who want to go to color get the benefits of color, - I don't agree with the Nuclear Weapon synergy sorry. For an ISP like XTRA to goto IPV6, all they would need to do is send out an e-mail / cd / floppy / virus ;) that upgrades the IP stack on the windows boxes (Because most all other OS's now by default have IPv6 support as mentioned before) - if Microsoft developed a IP Stack that has IPV6 support for all the granpa's who stil run 95' or simply don't want to continue to pay the MS Tax then a roll out of that type would be no issue. (Please correct me if I am wrong here) -----Original Message----- From: Arron Scott [mailto:ascott(a)cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2003 9:31 am To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: RE: [nznog] IPv6 at APE Someone in the IETF once made the statement that "IPv6 was somehwat like a Nuclear Weapon, hope we never have to use it, but nice to know it's there just in case". Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks. Are you seeing a real world move in America/Canada yet Joe ? Arron Scott -----Original Message----- From: Peter Macaulay [mailto:exedir(a)internetnz.net.nz] Sent: Monday, 26 May 2003 6:31 p.m. Cc: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 at APE InternetNZ will propose an IPv6 task Force within the next four months. We will provide infrastructure and admin. support. Looking forward to the NOG providing the IPV6TF with brain power and knowledge. IPV6 is inevitable, but who knows when it will become dominant, as the last flag day was the last flag day. Simon Byrnand wrote:
At 17:20 26/05/03 +1200, Nathan Ward wrote:
No demand for it because noone is using it. Noone uses v6 until someone else is. Noone used the Internet until someone else did either.. We've heard it all before..
I don't know about you, but I'm willing to put up my time etc. to try
and help seed the usage of v6.
If nothing else comes from it, it'd be nice to be one of the few in the know when/if v6 does /eventually/ come around.
The problem I can see with the introduction of ipv6 is that its such a
fundamental change, a bit like converting an entire country from imperial to metric, except that you're trying to convert the WHOLE world :)
Another analogy would be in trying to convert the entire world from the 60 second / 24 hour time system to "metric time". (Where there are
100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour etc - don't laugh, somebody tried in the 70's :)
Most of the things that have devloped on the internet have involved stepping stones that gave some measure of backward compatibility or transition phase until the old stuff was well and truly obsolete, but for something as fundamental as ip addresses its a big jump no matter what you do.... :/ Just think about all the legacy software that doesn't and never will work with ipv6 addressing too...(Win95 anyone ? :)
Regards, Simon
_______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
-- Peter Macaulay Executive Director InternetNZ Direct +64 4 495 2113 _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:31:00AM +1200, Arron Scott wrote:
Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks.
Yes, I have noticed that virtually every non-Cisco system on my network has a degree of IPv6 support. Can you remind us of the first GA-release version of IOS which supports IPv6? Maybe there are point releases in several streams. That will give a point to aim for when planning updates. Regards, RH.
Hi Richard, GD in the Cisco world is different than some, it is done when selected by our Customer Sat surveys, in conjunction with Customers identifying that we have met the new feature requirements for a given code family, not just when we think we have the bug list short enough. The key versions to look for IPv6 support would be 12.2S or 12.3, depending on your needs. I would stay away from 12.2T for any production environments, excellent for first in trials of new technology though. Obviously the "S" family is more Service Provider oriented than other releases, but there may be other features you want from the 12.3 releases. Hardware based v6 is available in the Cisco 12000's today, with two of our latest switches also shipping with IPv6 ASICs as well. Experience with (most of) 12.0S have proven very good over the years, even though it has never gone GD. I am hoping to see the same with 12.2S For full documentation on the IPv6 support see the following URL: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft /122t/122t13/ipv6/ftipv6r.htm PERSONALLY in my years at Telecom and University of Waikato, I felt that large-scale rollouts of new technology should be driven by business needs, not by geekdom. I did however run 12.1 (was it TY or something like that) back early in 2000 on a 7200 and a 2501 with a short term IPv6 in IPv4 tunnel to a test router in Sprint, to see how it all worked, and lo, it did, just nobody cared ;-) Arron -----Original Message----- From: richard(a)kcbbs.gen.nz [mailto:richard(a)kcbbs.gen.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2003 12:05 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 at APE On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:31:00AM +1200, Arron Scott wrote:
Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business
drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks.
Yes, I have noticed that virtually every non-Cisco system on my network has a degree of IPv6 support. Can you remind us of the first GA-release version of IOS which supports IPv6? Maybe there are point releases in several streams. That will give a point to aim for when planning updates. Regards, RH. _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
Sorry, One thing I forgot to state was that as a Field Sales Engineer, I am neither qualified or permitted to expressly recommend arbitrary software revisions for all customers. If you need help selecting IOS versions for specific purposes please contact either your Cisco Supplier, Cisco New Zealand, and/or the Cisco TAC, as we should assess your specific hardware and feature needs to ensure we make appropriate recommendations. Thanks Arron Scott -----Original Message----- From: richard(a)kcbbs.gen.nz [mailto:richard(a)kcbbs.gen.nz] Sent: Tuesday, 27 May 2003 12:05 p.m. To: nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz Subject: Re: [nznog] IPv6 at APE On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 09:31:00AM +1200, Arron Scott wrote:
Although obviously it is important the operations groups get to grips with v6 (and it's MANY implications), I still wonder what the business
drivers will be for people to use IPv6 extensively in NZ. Until a critical mass is reached it will be up to those who build IPv6 clouds to provide the v6-v4 gateways, and I still see the real work going on in China, and the mobile provider networks.
Yes, I have noticed that virtually every non-Cisco system on my network has a degree of IPv6 support. Can you remind us of the first GA-release version of IOS which supports IPv6? Maybe there are point releases in several streams. That will give a point to aim for when planning updates. Regards, RH. _______________________________________________ Nznog mailing list Nznog(a)list.waikato.ac.nz http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog
I received a couple of spam snail mails today from "Domain Registry of America" Melbourne, Australia, offering me the opportunity to renew a couple of my .com names with them at an extremely generous AUS$48 per year, and also to buy the equivalent names in .biz and .info. Obviously they're "yet another" pack of spammers who have trolled the .com whois and are seeking to make a buck out of it. But the interesting point is that when I do a whois on their domain, I get a message as follows: "Status: PROTECTED Note: To help prevent malicious domain hijacking and domain transfer errors, the registrar has protected the registrant of this domain name registrant by locking it. Any attempted transfers will be denied at the registry until the registrant requests otherwise. The registrant for the name may unlock the name at any time at the current registrar in order for a transfer initiation to succeed The data in this whois database is provided to you for information purposes only, that is, to assist you in obtaining information about or related to a domain name registration record. We make this information available "as is," and do not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a whois query, you agree that you will use this data only for lawful purposes and that, under no circumstances will you use this data to: (1) enable high volume, automated, electronic processes that stress or load this whois database system providing you this information; or (2) allow, enable, or otherwise support the transmission of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or solicitations via direct mail, electronic mail, or by telephone. The compilation, repackaging, dissemination or other use of this data is expressly prohibited without prior written consent from us. The registrar of record is . We reserve the right to modify these terms at any time. By submitting this query, you agree to abide by these terms." Isn't it somewhat ironic that these spammers seek to hide behind a veil of confidentiality, while freely using my information against me?? What, if anything, should ICANN be doing to stop these spammers? Keith Davidson
On Tuesday, May 27, 2003, at 08:42 PM, Keith Davidson wrote:
I received a couple of spam snail mails today from "Domain Registry of America" Melbourne, Australia, offering me the opportunity to renew a couple of my .com names with them at an extremely generous AUS$48 per year, and also to buy the equivalent names in .biz and .info.
Obviously they're "yet another" pack of spammers who have trolled the .com whois and are seeking to make a buck out of it.
But the interesting point is that when I do a whois on their domain, I get a message as follows:
"Status: PROTECTED Note: To help prevent malicious domain hijacking and domain transfer errors, the registrar has protected the registrant of this domain name registrant by locking it. Any attempted transfers will be denied at the registry until the registrant requests otherwise. The registrant for the name may unlock the name at any time at the current registrar in order for a transfer initiation to succeed
Isn't it somewhat ironic that these spammers seek to hide behind a veil of confidentiality, while freely using my information against me??
The "protected" status has nothing to do with their WHOIS registrant info which is freely available: Registrant Contact- Domain Registry of America Domain Registrar (registrar(a)droa.com) +1.8664340212 FAX- +1.8664340211 2316 Delaware Avenue, Suite 266 Buffalo, NY 14216-2687 US The status just shows that the domain is locked at the registry (by the Registrar) to prevent possible unauthorised hijacking. To see an example of a domain where the Registrant has provided ZERO information in the WHOIS, you have to check out names like dietk.com and dietkazaa.com: **** Registrant Contact: , - US **** DROA, IIRC, has been slapped by the FTC before, but that still hasn't stopped them. eNom could do something about it, but they're climbing up the Registrar charts, possibly due to DROA's success at duping people into moving their domains to eNom, so it's all good business for them.
What, if anything, should ICANN be doing to stop these spammers?
What, if anything, makes you think that ICANN cares?
Andy Gardner wrote:
The "protected" status has nothing to do with their WHOIS registrant info which is freely available:
Registrant Contact- <snip> The status just shows that the domain is locked at the registry (by the Registrar) to prevent possible unauthorised hijacking.
Sure, fat lot of use that is, if I wanted to, say, block their IP numbers or something...
To see an example of a domain where the Registrant has provided ZERO information in the WHOIS, you have to check out names like dietk.com and dietkazaa.com: <Snip>
That's compliant with which Internet RFC?
DROA, IIRC, has been slapped by the FTC before, but that still hasn't stopped them.
eNom could do something about it, but they're climbing up the Registrar charts, possibly due to DROA's success at duping people into moving their domains to eNom, so it's all good business for them.
I guess <sigh>
What, if anything, should ICANN be doing to stop these spammers?
What, if anything, makes you think that ICANN cares?
I'm certain that ICANN doesn't care - that's not the point. Keith Davidson
participants (11)
-
Andy Gardner -
Arron Scott -
Chris Hodgetts -
Joe Abley -
Keith Davidson -
Matthew G Brown -
Nathan Ward -
Peter Macaulay -
richard＠kcbbs.gen.nz -
Simon Byrnand -
TiM