From nobody Sat Mar 1 05:45:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 029EB1A09D2 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -115.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-115.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d7YVC6kh-ekk for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A97D1A09B2 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=140; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1393681513; x=1394891113; h=date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc; bh=n3WgplZeNdl6iLLkwUuzUgj4qkv9OCdYGzhHbDma7i0=; b=hfTo4M5eT/SJmocDIz1lYYou0NHWVtHr8AVxUEwiOuwM3Sz8t0PJNGaq aom8EEYpoAA1gRjjsnr5+wTRk8vQF9NAUcmLY1QvW0G5I6x5TCYBgT1O0 iOjLEokt6GRRq+T23TDJxzmLvRJVxPsM1jNHSTAL9sONwvZQB0gHOhD7L I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqoJACTjEVOrRDoH/2dsb2JhbABYgwY7q1oBlg8DBAKBExZ0gyU8NIhZDstVF45VHYQiBIlLkCOQeYNO X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,568,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="104800987" Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 01 Mar 2014 13:45:13 +0000 Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (irp-view13.cisco.com [171.70.120.60]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s21DjC41001588 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2014 13:45:12 GMT Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s21DjBfd025000; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:12 -0800 (PST) Received: (from fred@localhost) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id s21DjBKp024971; Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 05:45:11 -0800 (PST) From: Fred Baker Message-Id: <201403011345.s21DjBKp024971@irp-view13.cisco.com> To: v6ops@ietf.org Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yFCEbASjjR6mzJg3YnkzEdUjSDE Cc: draft-v6ops-jaeggli-pmtud-ecmp-problem@tools.ietf.org Subject: [v6ops] new draft: draft-v6ops-jaeggli-pmtud-ecmp-problem X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2014 13:45:17 -0000 A new draft has been posted, at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-v6ops-jaeggli-pmtud-ecmp-problem. Please take a look at it and comment. From nobody Wed Mar 5 03:05:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73C751A040E for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:05:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.982 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.982 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VZ6dmW1I60KX for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:05:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71D121A0423 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 03:05:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s25B5W6W005423 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 12:05:32 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 9632E2022ED for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 12:06:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 875D52022A1 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 12:06:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.54]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s25B5GaQ017960 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2014 12:05:32 +0100 Message-ID: <531704EC.6050402@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 12:05:16 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "v6ops@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010002060706070301020401" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/MY6MjC8OnwwnRU7bxiwe4Wofpi4 Subject: [v6ops] IPv6 over 802.11b, g, n, ac... (collectively labelled 'WiFi') X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 11:05:39 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010002060706070301020401 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, Related to the discussion at today's v6ops WG meeting around ND and low-power, other reduced links, and WiFi. I find that discussion interesting. As a side note, without diverging, One wonders whether it would be advantageous to document how currently IPv6 runs over WiFi links; it is just a little bit different than IPv6-over-Ethernet RFC2464. The documentation would not need to add any enhancement, e.g. still no IP address in beacon headers, just describe the existing widespread implementations. For example, there is an '802.11-to-Ethernet Adaptation Layer' if one can say so, which converts IEEE 802.11 Data Header and the LLC Header to an artificial Ethernet II header, before providing it to the stack: it copies the EtherType 0x86DD from the LLC header and the MAC addresses from the 802.11 Header to this artificial Ethernet header: +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ | 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+ ^ | 802.11-to-Ethernet Adaptation Layer | v +---------------------+-------------+---------+ | Ethernet II Header | IPv6 Header | Payload | +---------------------+-------------+---------+ (on Ethernet cables there is no IEEE 802.11 Data Header). A capture with wireshark would expose this: Radiotap Header v0 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Header Revision| Header Pad | Header length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Present flags | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Data Rate | Pad | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IEEE 802.11 Data Header +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type/Subtype and Frame Ctrl | Duration | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Receiver Address... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... Receiver Address | Transmitter Address... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... Transmitter Address | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | BSS Id... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... BSS Id | Frag Number and Seq Number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Logical-Link Control Header +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | DSAP |I| SSAP |C| Control field | Org. code... +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... Organizational Code | Type | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IPv6 Base Header +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Version| Traffic Class | Flow Label | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Payload Length | Next Header | Hop Limit | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + + | | + Source Address + | | + + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + + | | + Destination Address + | | + + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Alex --------------010002060706070301020401 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello,

Related to the discussion at today's v6ops WG meeting around ND and low-power, other reduced links, and WiFi.  I find that discussion interesting.

As a side note, without diverging,

One wonders whether it would be advantageous to document how currently IPv6 runs over WiFi links; it is just a little bit different than IPv6-over-Ethernet RFC2464.  The documentation would not need to add any enhancement, e.g. still no IP address in beacon headers, just describe the existing widespread implementations.

For example, there is an '802.11-to-Ethernet Adaptation Layer' if one can say so, which converts IEEE 802.11 Data Header and the LLC Header to an artificial Ethernet II header, before providing it to the stack: it copies the EtherType 0x86DD from the LLC header and the MAC addresses from the 802.11 Header to this artificial Ethernet header:


        +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+
        | 802.11 Data Header | LLC Header  | IPv6 Header | Payload |
        +--------------------+-------------+-------------+---------+

                                           ^
                                           |
                         802.11-to-Ethernet Adaptation Layer
                                           |
                                           v

                     +---------------------+-------------+---------+
                     | Ethernet II Header  | IPv6 Header | Payload |
                     +---------------------+-------------+---------+

(on Ethernet cables there is no IEEE 802.11 Data Header).

A capture with wireshark would expose this:

     Radiotap Header v0
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Header Revision|  Header Pad   |    Header length              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                         Present flags                         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     | Data Rate     |             Pad                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     IEEE 802.11 Data Header
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Type/Subtype and Frame Ctrl  |          Duration             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                      Receiver Address...
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     ... Receiver Address           |      Transmitter Address...
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      ... Transmitter Address                                        |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                            BSS Id...
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      ... BSS Id                     |  Frag Number and Seq Number   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Logical-Link Control Header
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |      DSAP   |I|     SSAP    |C| Control field | Org. code...
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      ... Organizational Code        |             Type              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     IPv6 Base Header
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |Version| Traffic Class |           Flow Label                  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |         Payload Length        |  Next Header  |   Hop Limit   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     +                                                               +
     |                                                               |
     +                         Source Address                        +
     |                                                               |
     +                                                               +
     |                                                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     +                                                               +
     |                                                               |
     +                      Destination Address                      +
     |                                                               |
     +                                                               +
     |                                                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Alex
 

--------------010002060706070301020401-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 05:33:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED7BC1A0129 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:33:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id s2ATiP4KsXhb for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:33:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E31241A019C for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 05:33:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 06555A1; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:33:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id F145D9A for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:33:47 +0100 (CET) Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:33:47 +0100 (CET) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" In-Reply-To: <20140225013520.5D56710401F0@rock.dv.isc.org> Message-ID: References: <20140214091302.13219.20624.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <52FEBE28.1010006@gmail.com> <8E2A8B56-6F05-4F09-BE7E-651B9CA42458@delong.com> <5300CE32.1050808@gmail.com> <530104B3.3070205@gmail.com> <53010E70.5000401@gmail.com> <20140217110013.GA31822@mushkin> <62FF9B8A-2F21-4FDD-B1D2-82B8C02A21B3@delong.com> <37638184-17C6-4C8B-86B1-C596A5A5504A@nominum.com> <530242C3.4070108@bogus.com> <5303CD3E.1010907@gmail.com> <5304BAAF.60608@gmail.com> <53052B43.2070904@gmail.com> <5305FFFD.5090708@foobar.org> <530606FB.9020707@umn.edu> <20140225013520.5D56710401F0@rock.dv.isc.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/QcjBdrNECVffzWK4g37flKDfu34 Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:33:56 -0000 In 3.3, it would probably be worthwhile to mention the replacement of RFC3484, ie RFC6724. If hosts implement RFC6724, running ULA for IPv6 connectivity and only having IPv4 Internet connectivity means a lot less breakage. If hosts implement RFC3484 then breakage will most likely be greater. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:05:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 802871A0156 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:05:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oqr4bCddT3av for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:05:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn1blp0187.outbound.protection.outlook.com [207.46.163.187]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46D2F1A0313 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:05:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.25) by BY2PR03MB596.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.255.93.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.893.10; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:05:25 +0000 Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) by BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) with mapi id 15.00.0893.001; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:05:25 +0000 From: Dave Thaler To: "draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations@tools.ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Anycast comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations Thread-Index: Ac85RHgA57pnElXrT2if6oRknDZ1Kw== Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:05:25 +0000 Message-ID: <753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630@BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [31.133.166.116] x-forefront-prvs: 0142F22657 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009001)(6009001)(428001)(199002)(189002)(56816005)(90146001)(33646001)(87936001)(63696002)(74706001)(47446002)(95666003)(74316001)(97336001)(97186001)(15202345003)(4396001)(56776001)(77982001)(69226001)(54316002)(81542001)(94946001)(86612001)(80976001)(92566001)(51856001)(74876001)(81686001)(19580395003)(83322001)(49866001)(54356001)(66066001)(81342001)(76786001)(94316002)(76796001)(46102001)(19300405004)(95416001)(76576001)(53806001)(85852003)(83072002)(76482001)(2656002)(74502001)(50986001)(87266001)(47736001)(59766001)(47976001)(65816001)(79102001)(74366001)(80022001)(81816001)(93136001)(76176001)(15975445006)(86362001)(31966008)(85306002)(93516002)(16236675002)(74662001)(24736002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB596; H:BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; CLIP:31.133.166.116; FPR:4E9A487C.8DF6C303.CDD59D8B.54F8D9B2.2014C; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en; received-spf: None (: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630BY2PR03MB412namprd03pro_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/A-qPlcguPQzWRDgDTRQp8xSEZHE Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: [v6ops] Anycast comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:05:39 -0000 --_000_753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630BY2PR03MB412namprd03pro_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There was a question about what, if anything, to say about deprecated site-= local addresses. I mentioned it may be worth looking to see if there's anything to say about= anycast address use, and Fred requested I send references to the list to look at. 1) See RFC 4339 sections 5.3.4 and 5.3.5. 2) Look for "site-local" in the middle of RFC 7094 section 2.1 and the= n read section 3.4, especially the history around RFC 4339. Again, I'm not necessarily saying we need to put text in about this case. I'm asking for folks (at least the authors) to take a look to determine whe= ther there's anything we ought to say. -Dave --_000_753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630BY2PR03MB412namprd03pro_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There was a question about what, if anything, to say= about deprecated site-local addresses.

I mentioned it may be worth looking to see if there&= #8217;s anything to say about anycast address

use, and Fred requested I send references to the lis= t to look at.

 

1)      See RFC 4339 sections 5.3.4 and 5.3.5.

2)      Look for “site-local” in the middle of = RFC 7094 section 2.1 and then read section 3.4,

especially the history around RFC 4339.<= /o:p>

 

Again, I’m not necessarily saying we need to p= ut text in about this case.

I’m asking for folks (at least the authors) to= take a look to determine whether

there’s anything we ought to say.

 

-Dave

 

--_000_753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630BY2PR03MB412namprd03pro_-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:16:40 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A5421A0388 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:16:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.925 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ebgt3BeSP9J3 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ie0-x231.google.com (mail-ie0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DA821A0384 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:16:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id rl12so2681194iec.22 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 06:16:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=oUnuwJoDrDgKouuM6Qfoq92guuTT1Td/0X1CdDQAlPA=; b=cgj7kWEZUbrN8x8mtRT6RvoSKgjwjIpHva3GdtRuBMDb2giaGGhyHK5n48V8+8rOBz J5FVJ+gsZEHWwjf/SnnNpcDdlmzKDtaz7QxNm5c0rr6dCZfkxWD8jTca86U6n1Tcyutx aLBK1bD+k8/4dSRCEfwVwZNKQJMQLbgoMfUwh1SNbyJVeoH6sH+l/SCnP3H1TTwdIe/+ PLQC1ji86LwBVC2Q48kdxV8MFMnOcLfkkDNkUeXwp/lTuD4eRgPUrQ0fuT7jWzJnVbcf up/RAGTV5ca+I3Rb3gOLZIdSIrUMPPfYQ22NnR46Vf87XZiBxuPAF2DQHhB7KV/o22kE 676A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=oUnuwJoDrDgKouuM6Qfoq92guuTT1Td/0X1CdDQAlPA=; b=anKxh5ao4wvC2GvVOz0BabcwGB6LT6X5vmzmlu1kEto+vd08dO1nPEVeTs4IU1CL3J e8RUXWuSxvvGCTdm6NBKLBUcjxRHdYAwL+y+9KuiqU4LcycElEIxdp/xwcUi4blW9gG1 8D7PlQrlz6WplT6jkozQAHxEZUVPII0MGHTX+7QaJtp00vZ9Tf72DSATGsROUJtqXbOw JUaeQWioowout21PMuCMVOTIeJqSRZCEw/jFEZqwlsvh8iAYYztUe7qjUe28F/hnDkMk gvCJgXbUDY8gTQctkeuvTUFrIXuxpKSRm/uAKtWmKDLMbfXIRMUj+KYk3hi4vgrrIIaC UYRQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk3Qg/Wy2GB0vZnqV5l8f4CNukEpq8BQA1CLP8B1FgoKIpcFm6e4sEl4po8vs/C3eykrfJCF3Vw1PcThvpGY5/fMsUknXopQkhfXgWzBviXnWUNwBfGcy1sIP+aE/SwUO8f2PbXQP+pkYqV8B3iggStoXpWTfB3YEFwcMTB8Q2LPRGE4aod9/rALHNyRJvmIRDoHWgs X-Received: by 10.42.20.6 with SMTP id e6mr9793847icb.29.1394115392352; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 06:16:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.18.136 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:16:12 -0800 (PST) From: Lorenzo Colitti Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:16:12 +0000 Message-ID: To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04190e62bcd92304f3f0c85f Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/OV6CatCCqlM-x59Wv8FC6aIKlrE Subject: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:16:38 -0000 --f46d04190e62bcd92304f3f0c85f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Section 3.2.1 says; In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), the network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? Is this something we want to recommend? --f46d04190e62bcd92304f3f0c85f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Section 3.2.1 says;

=C2=A0 =C2=A0In some very cons= trained situations(for example, in the sensors), the=C2=A0 =C2=A0network ne= eds ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which=C2=A0 =C2=A0doesn'= t need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like=C2=A0 =C2=A0= DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also=C2=A0 = =C2=A0needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway= =C2=A0 =C2=A0which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especial= ly when=C2=A0 =C2=A0a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet co= nnectivity,=C2=A0 =C2=A0this is quite a straightforward and efficient way.<= div>
It's not clear what constraints are referred to he= re. If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they supp= ort ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2?

Is thi= s something we want to recommend?
--f46d04190e62bcd92304f3f0c85f-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:35:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B51611A027D for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:35:56 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.767 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.767 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C8ydXD0UomOK for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:35:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB1C1A00A8 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:35:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s26EZiUI026633 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:35:44 GMT X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s26EZiUI026633 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1394116545; bh=uf4zJuvBBMTZ5uUWLrAQaWLyeMk=; h=From:Subject:Date:To:Mime-Version:References; b=pq3f2xl9qe4O6zgP0Ew+Z8JrGHkUUTn8oEPzki15prdy0ZGboXAGsB9BnGbmOP4RL a1uwFzgoHN7JMgbymGZY1hoEbXiN7wX1DW09QH+qrIEsvooj/2LPddH3Y9xxL3ekpj m4Wnpoy5PCLg/R0lh+jB0cjPV8xkcc8mJMz37vkk= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q25EZi0546026486pH ret-id none; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:35:44 +0000 Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:370:160:4e0:818a:f33f:74f9] ([IPv6:2001:67c:370:160:4e0:818a:f33f:74f9]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s26EYPiG010965 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:34:26 GMT From: Tim Chown Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2C82619C-8CC5-4C74-B235-EF305D3B1291" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:34:25 +0000 To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q25EZi054602648600; tid=q25EZi0546026486pH; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0 References: <12464C45-20A8-40E8-BFC9-265F05583AD7@ecs.soton.ac.uk> X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s26EZiUI026633 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/3B6MJLAsCzjJMKlA1rC5NX_0V7Q Subject: [v6ops] mif mpd X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:35:56 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_2C82619C-8CC5-4C74-B235-EF305D3B1291 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 So the text to look at for mif with respect to provisioning SLAAC and = DHC is: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mif-mpvd-arch-00 And comment to the mif list if you think there=92s contributions to be = made from the SLAAC/DHC problem statement. Tim= --Apple-Mail=_2C82619C-8CC5-4C74-B235-EF305D3B1291 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 So the = text to look at for mif with respect to provisioning SLAAC and DHC = is:


= And comment to the mif list if you think there=92s contributions to be = made from the SLAAC/DHC problem = statement.

Tim
= --Apple-Mail=_2C82619C-8CC5-4C74-B235-EF305D3B1291-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:49:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA4C71A00AB for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:49:12 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.983 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7NnEcQVmjExf for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:49:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr (oxalide-out.extra.cea.fr [132.168.224.8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64AD91A0070 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:49:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by oxalide.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s26En4FR002441; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:49:04 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 441E52029E7; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:50:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E32F20287F; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:50:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.35]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s26EmrZL016015; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:49:04 +0100 Message-ID: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:48:53 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lorenzo Colitti , "v6ops@ietf.org WG" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/YvcYtDW_D3mqIDfgaOaEJR3i55M Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:49:13 -0000 Le 06/03/2014 15:16, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit : > Section 3.2.1 says; > > In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), the > network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which > doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like > DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also > needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway > which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially > when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet > connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. > > It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. I guess it is sensor constraints, not NPT-box constraints. > If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they > support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? > > Is this something we want to recommend? I dont think it recommends, I think it observes, or it considers it a 'quite' straightforward way. Should it say MAY instead? Or 'attractive way'? Or should it add something else that NPT? (i.e. NAT). Alex > > > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:59:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 771171A0083 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.767 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.767 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id appYMqABxJR3 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC3D71A0002 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost.ecs.soton.ac.uk [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s26ExUxW000740 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:59:30 GMT X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s26ExUxW000740 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1394117970; bh=YjRgAEhlWYzOhK+dgBWxW3pXIdE=; h=From:Subject:Date:To:Mime-Version:References; b=FEjnpXMxhDRjZ9BSG8r14tVCiUzQWzMFoI0l8WfoNW5Kbg6Ju7BcKGIqJM67NQuFh 3ETdCVv/YnuAURlrC0z0UCREYSSZPHAtSJ5XgDIpnXGsiJElqiVLSDyfzy6HI0mlby qxFt7yzL1BD15aDtF2kxdVRSg7hyNrmouPk4NZcE= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q25ExU05460267595H ret-id none; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:59:30 +0000 Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:370:160:4e0:818a:f33f:74f9] ([IPv6:2001:67c:370:160:4e0:818a:f33f:74f9]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s26Ew9f9015463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:58:10 GMT From: Tim Chown Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_652F75A9-8ECF-4706-867A-4D38F5F162DB" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:58:09 +0000 To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q25ExU054602675900; tid=q25ExU05460267595H; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=1:0; fails=0 References: X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s26ExUxW000740 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/FBrajeaYvLKoJ9gSGVpMI1dfVz8 Subject: [v6ops] Results of A/M/O flags per OS X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:59:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_652F75A9-8ECF-4706-867A-4D38F5F162DB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, So the information is in the *appendix* in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-00. Tim= --Apple-Mail=_652F75A9-8ECF-4706-867A-4D38F5F162DB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Hi,

So the information is in the *appendix* in http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-00.

Tim
--Apple-Mail=_652F75A9-8ECF-4706-867A-4D38F5F162DB-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 06:59:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60EE51A0165 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.901 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kyTw-zTJ9jPd for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from usevmg20.ericsson.net (usevmg20.ericsson.net [198.24.6.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 585AC1A0177 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 06:59:45 -0800 (PST) X-AuditID: c618062d-b7f858e0000031c7-a4-53188d59df57 Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.87]) by usevmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 1B.0C.12743.95D88135; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:59:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [164.48.125.38] (147.117.188.8) by smtps-am.internal.ericsson.com (147.117.188.87) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.347.0; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:59:40 -0500 Message-ID: <53188D58.5020602@ericsson.com> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:59:36 -0500 From: Suresh Krishnan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [147.117.188.8] X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrIJMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPuG5kr0SwQVuTnMXpY3uZHRg9liz5 yRTAGMVlk5Kak1mWWqRvl8CV8f2xX8EmxooT3SkNjD2MXYycHBICJhLPO/8xQ9hiEhfurWcD sYUEjjBKTDta2sXIBWRvYZS4tuQ9WAOvgLbEupmvmUBsFgEViZ49W8BsNqBBG3Z+BrNFBcIk 2i/MZIaoF5Q4OfMJC4gtAlQ/5cx9sAXCAi4SOyf1gNnMArYSF+ZcZ4Gw5SW2v53DDHGEpsTW Nd9ZIY5TlHhx/CfTBEb+WUjGzkLSPgtJ+wJG5lWMHKXFqWW56UYGmxiBwXRMgk13B+Oel5aH GKU5WJTEeb+8dQ4SEkhPLEnNTk0tSC2KLyrNSS0+xMjEwSnVwCg56+L1ruNnphae3L2RSeH+ 6bKGloo9xXPvr9p3Od5iK6sl7/uKgtcCirUL0sNitp+ubrlg++2Vy/7U2cvMdxWyZx3V3Z3o pyL+zP/Znk0vTrqx3df+KC25+GaiT5v9DKsjd9ZsfnXQ00OiVHbx7389Xpum7fije06whr15 2gP12t9L1x6LU/6qxFKckWioxVxUnAgA1rIldvQBAAA= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-G_9O1qtV5jPxazVyOgmDFnEGCk Subject: [v6ops] (Long expired) IPv6 working group draft about M and O flags X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:59:48 -0000 Hi all, This is the draft I talked about on the mic. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ipv6-ra-mo-flags-01 Mikael, the ball is in your court :-) Cheers Suresh From nobody Thu Mar 6 07:58:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDDE1A0239 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 07:58:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aieK7F1_-Hpb for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 07:58:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from banjo.employees.org (banjo.employees.org [IPv6:2001:1868:205::19]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0869F1A0238 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 07:58:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from banjo.employees.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AF7A6047; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 07:58:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; s=selector1; bh=ypjU+C+VmSfVV4sVUg2o/ rwMaVs=; b=Wob/9923i/0Jw2pXwdLxAQ+q814gsbwktqpFd3E0pRtmuROKboJJQ NgNH0gcCeP2LgAmDCssNA5zY3yVJTe3P0qib07cjlTRuDotetsZz4q7hnh+cz4dE kVlptECrrq2o+X0NPcxrXHosMUvUjMqmr3fTKDzRiS/y6ZYSogvT+g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=employees.org; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; q=dns; s=selector1; b=R7Ju3phmqr1cx0J M0KtyyVexSbj92gNHj4PqkptsWuSwmO+xJ6JXNICpJkdb9T9PcPshVZTxzd9dCQK v4r6Nxl1Fx0owQ3CgusTf+sF86fpjo2HvyKKWv1ARE0cqh6TNxDC2n09mFx5oFtb gjiNUkmXmnEWNeii22TzyOah3TAs= Received: from dhcp-10-61-108-92.cisco.com (173-38-208-169.cisco.com [173.38.208.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: otroan) by banjo.employees.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04CB05FEB; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 07:58:03 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A8563FF7-A242-4907-91E7-4449B0976EE8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ole Troan In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:58:05 +0000 Message-Id: References: To: Tim Chown X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/EtQDQzYHbZNNlTHZxVIrjo50kCs Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] Results of A/M/O flags per OS X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:58:15 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_A8563FF7-A242-4907-91E7-4449B0976EE8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > So the information is in the *appendix* in = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problem-00. and for the record I do think there is very useful information there. that may also be useful in producing an implementation report (https://www.ietf.org/iesg/implementation-report.html) cheers, Ole --Apple-Mail=_A8563FF7-A242-4907-91E7-4449B0976EE8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJTGJsNAAoJEFuJXizso86g0bgH/AjkvInRvv5l2IF0E56Mg+0Z 5CC8591tJAO4JLMCmfvSHk2FYFU/2p//RdqDpu6tKoUr8hXe0qzD2Lii+FhNxMvz TXWWuQPfxZTWITAMO/ekviFoT+1dyMCUk7FXRkXEDEf5Q4U93BqU7tcuBtx9pVFJ m5XJ0c8rGxyg9EpfaTFoEAYpWuXlxF4ZR6sKt3XElaMbrpOJXtRG+AhXUVY7ZG7E EFHWTgyQy15XRKiwixSYdGm+7JCVdTI1dA4+RCtmuEhaAxBkX6ZoHefJbCG86g2B P7At+SEouGuUWbqU/VhltnWjom2PNlavM1nmLrFaZMS7Bx3q4Pj7U4cFcbAgRkk= =DbLw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_A8563FF7-A242-4907-91E7-4449B0976EE8-- From nobody Thu Mar 6 08:23:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EAD81A010E for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 08:23:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.983 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.983 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kTppH66qsZda for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F7891A00AA for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s26GNkNw013219 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:23:46 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id DEAE5202BBB for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:24:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFA2202B57 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:24:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.16]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s26GNUEb005226 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:23:46 +0100 Message-ID: <5318A102.2070908@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:23:30 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: v6ops@ietf.org References: <753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630@BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> In-Reply-To: <753876faed014a6d9ccefb8c5b460630@BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/BZYeBmCI1H_V0aZti2wxZC4qmJc Subject: Re: [v6ops] Anycast comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 16:23:54 -0000 Le 06/03/2014 15:05, Dave Thaler a écrit : > There was a question about what, if anything, to say about deprecated > site-local addresses. > > I mentioned it may be worth looking to see if there’s anything to say > about anycast address > > use, and Fred requested I send references to the list to look at. > > 1)See RFC 4339 sections 5.3.4 and 5.3.5. > > 2)Look for “site-local” in the middle of RFC 7094 section 2.1 and > then read section 3.4, > > especially the history around RFC 4339. > > Again, I’m not necessarily saying we need to put text in about this > case. > > I’m asking for folks (at least the authors) to take a look to > determine whether > > there’s anything we ought to say. Thanks for the pointer. I guess that if a Host in a local network uses ULA addressing, then it should still be able to discover a anycast-addressed DNS, or MIP HA, even though these may have 'site-local' scope, i.e. be in the local network. For example, one would construct fd00::/64 addresses which are anycast, by using an RFC2526 identifier 'Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses', and which have a 'site' significance to them. I think the same question may apply to multicast groups with site-local scope - ULA addressing in a local network may reach them. Alex > > -Dave > > > > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > From nobody Thu Mar 6 09:17:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11AB61A026A for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:17:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.121 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XRUUAf1HuENv for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:17:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from globis01.globis.net (RayH-1-pt.tunnel.tserv11.ams1.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f14:62e::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 715F21A01D6 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 09:17:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3D38714A5; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:17:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from globis01.globis.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.globis.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZNn8Qs9ByS+q; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:17:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from Rays-iMac.local (unknown [192.168.0.3]) (Authenticated sender: Ray.Hunter@globis.net) by globis01.globis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C8DCF870F7F; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 18:17:27 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5318ADA7.6010406@globis.net> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:17:27 +0100 From: Ray Hunter User-Agent: Postbox 3.0.9 (Macintosh/20140129) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandru Petrescu References: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/upR4AVLBg10s-Zl5IXbvZGRXyiE Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:17:34 -0000 Alexandru Petrescu wrote: > Le 06/03/2014 15:16, Lorenzo Colitti a écrit : >> Section 3.2.1 says; >> >> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), the >> network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which >> doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like >> DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also >> needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway >> which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially >> when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet >> connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. >> >> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. > > I guess it is sensor constraints, not NPT-box constraints. How names spaces? It's a can of worms for nodes that move across the prefix translation boundary. > >> If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they >> support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? >> >> Is this something we want to recommend? > Not IMHO. Any sort of translation starts making name spaces and caching on highly mobile nodes much tougher than it needs to be. It may be easier for the individual sensors, but it makes the overall Internet a poorer place. If there needs to be any gateway due to resource constraints, it should be an ALG placed between the sensor segment and the rest of the Internet IMVHO. > I dont think it recommends, I think it observes, or it considers it a > 'quite' straightforward way. Should it say MAY instead? Or 'attractive > way'? > > Or should it add something else that NPT? (i.e. NAT). > > Alex > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> > > > -- Regards, RayH From nobody Thu Mar 6 10:44:46 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA76A1A01EE; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:44:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJqU4yr31_Dx; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:44:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B33B71A01FD; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 10:44:38 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.1.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:44:38 -0800 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/qMg7RW2yf6eHPbPHwsG8NHDjoCM Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 18:44:41 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : Design Choices for IPv6 Networks Authors : Philip Matthews Victor Kuarsingh Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2014-03-06 Abstract: This document presents advice on the design choices that arise when designing IPv6 networks (both dual-stack and IPv6-only). The intended audience is someone designing an IPv6 network who is knowledgeable about best current practices around IPv4 network design, and wishes to learn the corresponding practices for IPv6. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Thu Mar 6 11:01:02 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1466A1A00F2 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 11:01:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JMZTCdVK6mao for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 11:00:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-01.primus.ca (smtp1.primus.ca [209.216.129.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4D831A0088 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 11:00:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [130.129.14.22] by mail-01.primus.ca with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WLdXJ-0001jA-3B; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:00:54 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Philip Matthews In-Reply-To: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 19:00:52 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <576047A5-FFAC-4541-97A8-D90DE720CBA6@magma.ca> References: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> To: v6ops list X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) X-Authenticated: philip_matthews - ([130.129.14.22]) [130.129.14.22] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/OLZJT4GEmglScGek_rd9NMFTjs4 Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 19:01:01 -0000 Folks: It has been a while since an update to this document has been published, = and I apologize for that. However, thanks to much help from Victor (who = is now a co-author) and some prodding today by John, a new revision is = now ready. Both Victor and I were very busy in the last few months and = were not able to get a revision out in time for this week's meeting. Originally, the plan was to expand the document with a bunch of = additional topics. Both Victor and I have ideas, but what we lack is = time to work on them. So we are now thinking of keeping the list of = topics covered to what is in this version, and covering new topics = somewhere else. With this plan, the hope is that we can finish this WG = document in a timely manner. As always, comments are most welcome. - Philip On 2014-03-06, at 18:44 , internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. >=20 > Title : Design Choices for IPv6 Networks > Authors : Philip Matthews > Victor Kuarsingh > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt > Pages : 13 > Date : 2014-03-06 >=20 > Abstract: > This document presents advice on the design choices that arise when > designing IPv6 networks (both dual-stack and IPv6-only). The > intended audience is someone designing an IPv6 network who is > knowledgeable about best current practices around IPv4 network > design, and wishes to learn the corresponding practices for IPv6. >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices/ >=20 > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 >=20 > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 From nobody Thu Mar 6 17:22:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E7471A0198 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:22:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mUh-w3IVVTCl for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:22:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from nm37-vm4.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm37-vm4.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [72.30.238.204]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A678A1A0010 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:22:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from [98.139.214.32] by nm37.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2014 01:22:07 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.241] by tm15.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2014 01:22:07 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1050.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Mar 2014 01:22:07 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 267658.59865.bm@omp1050.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 85965 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Mar 2014 01:22:07 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com.au; s=s1024; t=1394155327; bh=6i1LmZsf1PTnyp96HXAZ8yzZt79F1EAQY6x0kN1U3Ak=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=PUHDA/eqGWovMU4EOAu52Uql+qjC/H1Y5e3P6by+NW+GoTO57SEElucS9Ecjg/90qCik2TOTYPxQa9o7FsPQjv5gt4XLdIbUw796sGkmABNgevg/iutsfdVU6VHfwXLoFvUt3hc9Ekoj9LrXTbbIHsvMnEe562Jeofief0Eaekk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=RPCuEvDNRzCideCIj1B3ktQFpUt65kZkDVuAxIMryFLq4PtpZIVmRASvRfWF9OfRH1na5C+0swWifcx7dqhAD6z3VG2ihnKRcQl3zhxj+DUCN0ILbIvdeYWauJtkDgjMLDNMVgb0/kcPGspad8ql7JQMT80N32rokJHwN47AW6k=; X-YMail-OSG: rGciO.0VM1nJ8QSeieNaDXG3pOm.PLWndxp4_HgouMoqgxM gFDFjaGX9AFsopGFik3nqWpoU3GL1sG7kYwyvChAlggIFDS.W5L28NFzkw9l WBd8hpeLHpRCd0tjDYcXz2cTMJrgK7l8fmXlwGKtrWUBdavNGPfZV7ejBZYP WXBonL8qyXFipdPekGPBCYnHPnXe1KykOjVMalsH4mPWTX66CO47JiDNZzoj WM57m_N.I4vQYkCnTb8FdQDvMYSpGFpp6hnxH.zbo455pUIYIpnAFVdY9GVI fWAwbBOT7wFg.7oHFsdnClOgwBebRX3iBRpEZqLbjtJNwTuNYKLsZnlLRWD. e57KI613wbNUpSTfhFjYQRbyp4v60GwnyUpAJ2P5txFKAxEFPO2p.hNGlT_3 EBZ9Qr3M1wnxc4ATZYTbmMdePmreGbNG0NRJwNRA6Hnb0NNPwoOh7XvXya_7 Lu0Mc275sLhNXgIGEaYQoCrFugiqZ0rSuv09uwoENoo1JMTO1F0YvYfvwxHZ f5lfdzYoepnRY8IzI1uApJuEKW3kiJZYoMzHx_skDQbShQcljszGwzWClp38 Mszk3fkG.A2DJiKBoJERaVwg- Received: from [150.101.221.237] by web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 17:22:07 PST X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgoKCgo.X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KPiBGcm9tOiBMb3JlbnpvIENvbGl0dGkgPGxvcmVuem9AZ29vZ2xlLmNvbT4KPlRvOiAidjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgV0ciIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4gCj5TZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIDcgTWFyY2ggMjAxNCAxOjE2IEFNCj5TdWJqZWN0OiBbdjZvcHNdIE5QVDY2IGNvbW1lbnQgb24gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi12Nm9wcy11bGEtdXNhZ2UtcmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zCj4gCj4KPgo.U2VjdGlvbiAzLjIuMSBzYXlzOwo.Cj7CoCDCoEluIHNvbWUgdmVyeSABMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.177.636 References: Message-ID: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 17:22:07 -0800 (PST) From: Mark ZZZ Smith To: Lorenzo Colitti , "v6ops@ietf.org WG" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7THngNgESp90ZQVidc9X-GPSJhs Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mark ZZZ Smith List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 01:22:13 -0000 =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A>________________________________=0A> From: Lorenzo Colitti = =0A>To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" =0A>Sent: = Friday, 7 March 2014 1:16 AM=0A>Subject: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-iet= f-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations=0A> =0A>=0A>=0A>Section 3.2.1 says;=0A>= =0A>=A0 =A0In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors)= , the=A0 =A0network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which= =A0 =A0doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like= =A0 =A0DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also= =A0 =A0needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway= =A0 =A0which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially whe= n=A0 =A0a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet connectivity,= =A0 =A0this is quite a straightforward and efficient way.=0A>=0A>=0A>It's n= ot clear what constraints are referred to here. If the sensor nodes already= support SLAAC, then why can't they support ULA+GUA as documented in sectio= n 3.2.2?=0A>=0A>=0A>Is this something we want to recommend?=0A=0AI don't th= ink it is.=A0If a node is so resource constrained that it can't support 3 I= Pv6 prefixes instead of two (i.e., LL + ULA vs LL + ULA + GUA), then I'd wo= nder if it has enough resources to to run even a basic application usefully= .=0A=0AIf it can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes, perhaps the node shouldn't be a= general purpose computer that supports running applications locally at all= , but should instead be an input or output device of some form that is atta= ched via something much simpler than IPv6 to a computer that does run the a= pplications and does run IPv6 well enough.=0A=0ARegards,=0AMark. From nobody Thu Mar 6 23:30:56 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4461A0239 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:30:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.383 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.383 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x81dH212DGz4 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:30:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from cirse-out.extra.cea.fr (cirse-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.142]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7541A0200 for ; Thu, 6 Mar 2014 23:30:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by cirse.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s277Uj3x021756; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 08:30:45 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id E6FF2202D42; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 08:31:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id D97C7202D1F; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 08:31:50 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([132.166.86.6]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s277UQ9X002673; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 08:30:44 +0100 Message-ID: <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 08:30:26 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark ZZZ Smith , Lorenzo Colitti , "v6ops@ietf.org WG" References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yq8kmMJkzmQYHofBLOQnf6d4KNQ Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 07:30:53 -0000 Le 07/03/2014 02:22, Mark ZZZ Smith a écrit : > > > > > >> ________________________________ From: Lorenzo Colitti >> To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Sent: >> Friday, 7 March 2014 1:16 AM Subject: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on >> draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations >> >> >> >> Section 3.2.1 says; >> >> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), >> the network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing >> which doesn't need much code to support address assignment >> mechanisms like DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If >> the network also needs to connect to the outside, then there can >> be an NPTv6 gateway which is not subject to extreme resource >> constraints. Especially when a lightweight isolated network needs >> to add Internet connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and >> efficient way. >> >> >> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. If the sensor >> nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they support ULA+GUA as >> documented in section 3.2.2? >> >> >> Is this something we want to recommend? > > I don't think it is. If a node is so resource constrained that it > can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes instead of two (i.e., LL + ULA vs LL + > ULA + GUA), then I'd wonder if it has enough resources to to run > even a basic application usefully. > > If it can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes, perhaps the node shouldn't be a > general purpose computer that supports running applications locally > at all, but should instead be an input or output device of some form > that is attached via something much simpler than IPv6 to a computer > that does run the applications and does run IPv6 well enough. In this direction, a possibility may be to make IPv6 adapt to the simplest applications on such nodes: maybe only use one address (presumably ULA or GUA, but not LL), maybe lower the RFC2460 minimal MTU to 41bytes (full base header and 1 byte of app), maybe run only one autoconfig protocol (not both RA+DHCP and that link layer's autoconfig), and so on. I think the use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not necessarily inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, or not. But, if asked whether preferring a ULA address on the sensor, or just that link layer's address, I'd prefer the former, because it has larger scope, could be reached from more places. Alex > > Regards, Mark. > > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > From nobody Fri Mar 7 00:53:16 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CEC11A010B for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:53:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mqbUUM6PyY96 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:53:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDA071A002B for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:53:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s278mWGx001576 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:48:33 -0800 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s278mWGx001576 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394182114; bh=Kev3pjHFZmBFMdxftKpvjsFzK38=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=wzQrVNrBCWn8z55wmfNp1SNvtM/QB9yh5ycRq+O8mGSTeVluHYazXo1kSf0ww2Pb+ mm0zVE4bAZYgQsM3VsS/9nFjL/Px6NTCYjMOqBxmq+BPc9HgILjP54K09+d1bpjtjf h4RNnMZ9j9qmUNuvHIdKmuD9zsjHk2ukT+ZvF5rs= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:47:38 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Lorenzo Colitti X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:48:34 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/GZhSK_yyK5pgn0x43MwOcavr0Qw Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 08:53:15 -0000 On Mar 6, 2014, at 6:16 AM, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > Section 3.2.1 says; >=20 > In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), = the network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which = doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like = DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also = needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway = which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially when = a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet connectivity, = this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. >=20 > It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. If the sensor = nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they support ULA+GUA as = documented in section 3.2.2? +1 >=20 > Is this something we want to recommend? No, it is something we should recommend against. Owen From nobody Fri Mar 7 00:58:06 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD5B41A0123 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:58:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L1434ZiZ37_J for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBB51A0113 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:58:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s278rVVS001625 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:53:36 -0800 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s278rVVS001625 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394182417; bh=T6r7kt9+Fho1jNdOjuOjtyOBjys=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=pvRIbYUi9/KapIRhw9uuH5nxTRP3IhL6IWfV3w+7A4vzo0cvnRqZmwbu65y+UTH1Y kV+q37m3hh3Huauw89n6lZcj8d9W8O22RFhtY8+XhBwmHdoJepfhU8AFdNZgMxXwIl L8VLTEhDG1byVGVQyyY81WWRd6zTNnIAsEgy2tC8= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 00:52:56 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4C8E4C88-ECC0-4EE0-BA14-E4E1C413A4D7@delong.com> References: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Fri, 07 Mar 2014 00:53:37 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/NavYIQ8_jd8n_8r17ELdKX6lMxI Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 08:58:05 -0000 On Mar 6, 2014, at 6:48 AM, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: > Le 06/03/2014 15:16, Lorenzo Colitti a =E9crit : >> Section 3.2.1 says; >>=20 >> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), the >> network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which >> doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like >> DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also >> needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway >> which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially >> when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet >> connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. >>=20 >> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. >=20 > I guess it is sensor constraints, not NPT-box constraints. >=20 >> If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they >> support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? >>=20 >> Is this something we want to recommend? >=20 > I dont think it recommends, I think it observes, or it considers it a > 'quite' straightforward way. Should it say MAY instead? Or = 'attractive > way=92? 1. I don=92t understand how this is =93quite straightforward=94. It = has all the problems and complications of NAT, where as the ULA+GUA = outlined in 3.2.2 is, in fact, quite straightforward. 2. Calling it =93quite straightforward=94 is, in essentially an = endorsement in the English vernacular. 3. I don=92t think changing to MAY helps. 4. Calling it =93attractive way=94 is going in the wrong direction. In short, I see little need for this scenario other than perhaps = documenting it as a less preferred alternative than 3.2.2 and = documenting the reasons for said preference. Owen >=20 > Or should it add something else that NPT? (i.e. NAT). >=20 > Alex >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Fri Mar 7 01:27:46 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D6F1A0276 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:27:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0oBjOaRzOjMN for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:27:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5E8F1A0159 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:27:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s279Odtq002238 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:24:40 -0800 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s279Odtq002238 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394184281; bh=hnZWfYgXm7UoJ0u6flHoHxh/yhg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=hlZoh5X7e/HTV9Ts62VJ+72SPflRBrZxWgeVRroA4V9ki15lcE5fBV6HJbOj0jUxW GKnO1wN4wBTKnR6riGVzhnTdTJzkX6Lp6AelpZ16w/FcVIb67s1ZanMSt9d8Q3Tx+D M7AEEseq+DaVCCkNkmaTWPD+SV6k+976G7h+CNAw= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:24:18 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <5FBAF77B-458A-41B5-9145-841AF349EA04@delong.com> References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> To: Mark ZZZ Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Fri, 07 Mar 2014 01:24:41 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/kYoXzuzex2bwF_dN7p2m9o6KbJs Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:27:39 -0000 > If it can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes, perhaps the node shouldn't be a = general purpose computer that supports running applications locally at = all, but should instead be an input or output device of some form that = is attached via something much simpler than IPv6 to a computer that does = run the applications and does run IPv6 well enough. There=92s a lot of room between =93so constrained it can=92t handle 3 = prefixes=94 and =93a general purpose computer that supports running = applications locally=94. The latter is not a requirement for an IPv6 node, nor should it be. = However, with current technology, even the smallest and simplest of = sensors that have enough hardware to be on a network directly ought to = be able to handle 3 prefixes. Indeed, perhaps we should determine some = minimum number of IPv6 prefixes and some minimum number of addresses = that we think a minimalist node should be capable of supporting and = document that in an RFC. (not applicable to this draft, but perhaps = worthy of a new draft). Owen From nobody Fri Mar 7 01:43:24 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D19CD1A018A for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:43:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.938 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.938 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7kDRMLK1kiun for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6102B1A0164 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:43:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s279bPZf002431 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:38:02 -0800 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s279bPZf002431 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394185083; bh=mrYZuDU8ohSe5vJJqRM//dwuNAg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=JHO1+m0HZcEXAuvGVUfveLct9Xf6HYtOW63vX4IcpOJINzmWO13R9eQ7ZWIikP2Lc Vqha0OssdlaTb/SbfJrBjGA6PKL+632UELY7pkjFFfNCiKV4Bnr5dYCUaG86Ff//ib /M7IpMIwksVWZtaf6abW2GZeNSsHZL6LzueQai+0= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 01:37:03 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Fri, 07 Mar 2014 01:38:03 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/vhRWwY6PcGmoUMxwK1ldHvcLEtg Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 09:43:18 -0000 On Mar 6, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: > Le 07/03/2014 02:22, Mark ZZZ Smith a =E9crit : >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> ________________________________ From: Lorenzo Colitti >>> To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Sent: >>> Friday, 7 March 2014 1:16 AM Subject: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on >>> draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Section 3.2.1 says; >>>=20 >>> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), >>> the network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing >>> which doesn't need much code to support address assignment >>> mechanisms like DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If >>> the network also needs to connect to the outside, then there can >>> be an NPTv6 gateway which is not subject to extreme resource >>> constraints. Especially when a lightweight isolated network needs >>> to add Internet connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and >>> efficient way. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. If the sensor >>> nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they support ULA+GUA as >>> documented in section 3.2.2? >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> Is this something we want to recommend? >>=20 >> I don't think it is. If a node is so resource constrained that it >> can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes instead of two (i.e., LL + ULA vs LL + >> ULA + GUA), then I'd wonder if it has enough resources to to run >> even a basic application usefully. >>=20 >> If it can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes, perhaps the node shouldn't be a >> general purpose computer that supports running applications locally >> at all, but should instead be an input or output device of some form >> that is attached via something much simpler than IPv6 to a computer >> that does run the applications and does run IPv6 well enough. >=20 > In this direction, a possibility may be to make IPv6 adapt to the > simplest applications on such nodes: maybe only use one address > (presumably ULA or GUA, but not LL), maybe lower the RFC2460 minimal = MTU > to 41bytes (full base header and 1 byte of app), maybe run only one > autoconfig protocol (not both RA+DHCP and that link layer's = autoconfig), > and so on. This makes no sense=85 Too many things depend on LL and eliminating it would be a pretty fundamental redesign of the protocol functionality. I don=92t think we need to redesign the protocol for small nodes. The = reality is that nobody has yet claimed an actual node that can=92t handle a third = prefix, there is merely some level of speculation that such a node might exist. It is expected that most constrained nodes will run ND/SLAAC only and = will not support DHCPv6. (such nodes aren=92t likely to be routers, so they should not be = sending RAs). > I think the use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not > necessarily inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, or not. I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as a recommended or = straight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. ULA without NPT for local = connectivity is tolerable. ULA+GUA for stable local connectivity with transient global connectivity = is tolerable. Persistent GUA is better for the vast majority of applications. ULA+NPT is simply a really bad idea in virtually any context. > But, if asked whether preferring a ULA address on the sensor, or just > that link layer's address, I'd prefer the former, because it has = larger > scope, could be reached from more places. I don=92t think this is a question of either/or and I think you are = conflating several issues that aren=92t part of this thread and perhaps not really related = to this document into the discussion. Owen >=20 From nobody Fri Mar 7 10:52:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED9F1A0105 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 10:51:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.781 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.781 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RrbN2DBDSbJc for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 10:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A44AA1A006B for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 10:51:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from ([24.40.56.114]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.120165845; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 11:51:48 -0700 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.53]) by PACDCEXHUB01.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::84e8:95f3:f13b:169e%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 13:51:47 -0500 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Alexandru Petrescu , Mark ZZZ Smith , Lorenzo Colitti , "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations Thread-Index: AQHPOUa1pr85MHnBpE+CtMke73ba6prVKJOAgABm6ACAAFcHgA== Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2014 18:51:47 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.246] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3CE7F79E3BD2374C8D9AF7DE5886E2F2@cable.comcast.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_g2gyIsTVSOh206CKsbIPa9Kc_s Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:51:58 -0000 VGhlIGZvbGxvd2luZyBxdWVzdGlvbiBmcm9tIExvcmVuem8gc2VlbXMgdmFsaWQuICBJbiB0aGUg dGhyZWFkIHRodXMgZmFyIEkNCmhhdmUgbm90IHNlZW4gYSByZXBseS4gIENhbiB0aGUgYXV0aG9y cyBwbGVhc2UgY29tbWVudCBvbiB0aGUgYmVsb3c/DQoNCiJJdCdzIG5vdCBjbGVhciB3aGF0IGNv bnN0cmFpbnRzIGFyZSByZWZlcnJlZCB0byBoZXJlLiBJZiB0aGUgc2Vuc29yIG5vZGVzDQphbHJl YWR5IHN1cHBvcnQgU0xBQUMsIHRoZW4gd2h5IGNhbid0IHRoZXkgc3VwcG9ydCBVTEErR1VBIGFz IGRvY3VtZW50ZWQNCmluIHNlY3Rpb24gMy4yLjI/Ig0KDQpKb2huDQoNCj09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQpKb2huIEphc29uIEJyem96b3dza2kNCkNvbWNh c3QgQ2FibGUNCm0pIDYwOS0zNzctNjU5NA0KbykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwDQp3KSB3d3cuY29tY2Fz dDYubmV0DQplKSBqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29tY2FzdC5jb20NCj09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFs IE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogQWxleGFuZHJ1IFBldHJlc2N1IDxhbGV4YW5kcnUucGV0cmVz Y3VAZ21haWwuY29tPg0KRGF0ZTogRnJpZGF5LCBNYXJjaCA3LCAyMDE0IDc6MzAgQU0NClRvOiBN YXJrIFpaWiBTbWl0aCA8bWFya3p6enNtaXRoQHlhaG9vLmNvbS5hdT4sIExvcmVuem8gQ29saXR0 aQ0KPGxvcmVuem9AZ29vZ2xlLmNvbT4sIHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6 IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIE5QVDY2IGNvbW1lbnQgb24NCmRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdl LXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucw0KDQo+TGUgMDcvMDMvMjAxNCAwMjoyMiwgTWFyayBaWlogU21pdGgg YSDDqWNyaXQgOg0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pg0KPj4NCj4+DQo+Pj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX18gRnJvbTogTG9yZW56byBDb2xpdHRpDQo+Pj4gPGxvcmVuem9AZ29vZ2xlLmNv bT4gVG86ICJ2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBXRyIgPHY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnPiBTZW50Og0KPj4+IEZy aWRheSwgNyBNYXJjaCAyMDE0IDE6MTYgQU0gU3ViamVjdDogW3Y2b3BzXSBOUFQ2NiBjb21tZW50 IG9uDQo+Pj4gZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi12Nm9wcy11bGEtdXNhZ2UtcmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zDQo+Pj4N Cj4+Pg0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gU2VjdGlvbiAzLjIuMSBzYXlzOw0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gSW4gc29tZSB2ZXJ5 IGNvbnN0cmFpbmVkIHNpdHVhdGlvbnMoZm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIGluIHRoZSBzZW5zb3JzKSwNCj4+ PiB0aGUgICBuZXR3b3JrIG5lZWRzIFVMQSBhcyB0aGUgb24tZGVtYW5kIGFuZCBzdGFibGUgYWRk cmVzc2luZw0KPj4+IHdoaWNoICAgZG9lc24ndCBuZWVkIG11Y2ggY29kZSB0byBzdXBwb3J0IGFk ZHJlc3MgYXNzaWdubWVudA0KPj4+IG1lY2hhbmlzbXMgbGlrZSAgIERIQ1Agb3IgZnVsbCBORCAo Tm90ZTogc3VyZWx5IGl0IG5lZWRzIFNMQUFDKS4gSWYNCj4+PiB0aGUgbmV0d29yayBhbHNvICAg bmVlZHMgdG8gY29ubmVjdCB0byB0aGUgb3V0c2lkZSwgdGhlbiB0aGVyZSBjYW4NCj4+PiBiZSBh biBOUFR2NiBnYXRld2F5ICAgd2hpY2ggaXMgbm90IHN1YmplY3QgdG8gZXh0cmVtZSByZXNvdXJj ZQ0KPj4+IGNvbnN0cmFpbnRzLiBFc3BlY2lhbGx5IHdoZW4gICBhIGxpZ2h0d2VpZ2h0IGlzb2xh dGVkIG5ldHdvcmsgbmVlZHMNCj4+PiB0byBhZGQgSW50ZXJuZXQgY29ubmVjdGl2aXR5LCAgIHRo aXMgaXMgcXVpdGUgYSBzdHJhaWdodGZvcndhcmQgYW5kDQo+Pj4gZWZmaWNpZW50IHdheS4NCj4+ Pg0KPj4+DQo+Pj4gSXQncyBub3QgY2xlYXIgd2hhdCBjb25zdHJhaW50cyBhcmUgcmVmZXJyZWQg dG8gaGVyZS4gSWYgdGhlIHNlbnNvcg0KPj4+IG5vZGVzIGFscmVhZHkgc3VwcG9ydCBTTEFBQywg dGhlbiB3aHkgY2FuJ3QgdGhleSBzdXBwb3J0IFVMQStHVUEgYXMNCj4+PiBkb2N1bWVudGVkIGlu IHNlY3Rpb24gMy4yLjI/DQo+Pj4NCj4+Pg0KPj4+IElzIHRoaXMgc29tZXRoaW5nIHdlIHdhbnQg dG8gcmVjb21tZW5kPw0KPj4NCj4+IEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgaXQgaXMuIElmIGEgbm9kZSBpcyBz byByZXNvdXJjZSBjb25zdHJhaW5lZCB0aGF0IGl0DQo+PiBjYW4ndCBzdXBwb3J0IDMgSVB2NiBw cmVmaXhlcyBpbnN0ZWFkIG9mIHR3byAoaS5lLiwgTEwgKyBVTEEgdnMgTEwgKw0KPj4gIFVMQSAr IEdVQSksIHRoZW4gSSdkIHdvbmRlciBpZiBpdCBoYXMgZW5vdWdoIHJlc291cmNlcyB0byB0byBy dW4NCj4+IGV2ZW4gYSBiYXNpYyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiB1c2VmdWxseS4NCj4+DQo+PiBJZiBpdCBj YW4ndCBzdXBwb3J0IDMgSVB2NiBwcmVmaXhlcywgcGVyaGFwcyB0aGUgbm9kZSBzaG91bGRuJ3Qg YmUgYQ0KPj4gIGdlbmVyYWwgcHVycG9zZSBjb21wdXRlciB0aGF0IHN1cHBvcnRzIHJ1bm5pbmcg YXBwbGljYXRpb25zIGxvY2FsbHkNCj4+ICBhdCBhbGwsIGJ1dCBzaG91bGQgaW5zdGVhZCBiZSBh biBpbnB1dCBvciBvdXRwdXQgZGV2aWNlIG9mIHNvbWUgZm9ybQ0KPj4gIHRoYXQgaXMgYXR0YWNo ZWQgdmlhIHNvbWV0aGluZyBtdWNoIHNpbXBsZXIgdGhhbiBJUHY2IHRvIGEgY29tcHV0ZXINCj4+ ICB0aGF0IGRvZXMgcnVuIHRoZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgYW5kIGRvZXMgcnVuIElQdjYgd2VsbCBl bm91Z2guDQo+DQo+SW4gdGhpcyBkaXJlY3Rpb24sIGEgcG9zc2liaWxpdHkgbWF5IGJlIHRvIG1h a2UgSVB2NiBhZGFwdCB0byB0aGUNCj5zaW1wbGVzdCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgb24gc3VjaCBub2Rl czogbWF5YmUgb25seSB1c2Ugb25lIGFkZHJlc3MNCj4ocHJlc3VtYWJseSBVTEEgb3IgR1VBLCBi dXQgbm90IExMKSwgbWF5YmUgbG93ZXIgdGhlIFJGQzI0NjAgbWluaW1hbCBNVFUNCj50byA0MWJ5 dGVzIChmdWxsIGJhc2UgaGVhZGVyIGFuZCAxIGJ5dGUgb2YgYXBwKSwgbWF5YmUgcnVuIG9ubHkg b25lDQo+YXV0b2NvbmZpZyBwcm90b2NvbCAobm90IGJvdGggUkErREhDUCBhbmQgdGhhdCBsaW5r IGxheWVyJ3MgYXV0b2NvbmZpZyksDQo+YW5kIHNvIG9uLg0KPg0KPkkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHVzZSBv ZiBVTEFzIGlzIG5vdCBwcmV2ZW50aW5nIGFueSBvZiB0aGVzZSwgYW5kIGlzIG5vdA0KPm5lY2Vz c2FyaWx5IGludml0aW5nIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgTlBUIC0gaXQgY291bGQgd29yayB3aXRoIGl0LCBv ciBub3QuDQo+DQo+QnV0LCBpZiBhc2tlZCB3aGV0aGVyIHByZWZlcnJpbmcgYSBVTEEgYWRkcmVz cyBvbiB0aGUgc2Vuc29yLCBvciBqdXN0DQo+dGhhdCBsaW5rIGxheWVyJ3MgYWRkcmVzcywgSSdk IHByZWZlciB0aGUgZm9ybWVyLCBiZWNhdXNlIGl0IGhhcyBsYXJnZXINCj5zY29wZSwgY291bGQg YmUgcmVhY2hlZCBmcm9tIG1vcmUgcGxhY2VzLg0KPg0KPkFsZXgNCj4NCj4+DQo+PiBSZWdhcmRz LCBNYXJrLg0KPj4NCj4+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fIHY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4gdjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cu aWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby92Nm9wcw0KPj4NCj4+DQo+DQo+DQo+X19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj52Nm9wcyBtYWlsaW5nIGxp c3QNCj52Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGlu Zm8vdjZvcHMNCg0K From nobody Fri Mar 7 17:03:43 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE771A02F7 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 17:03:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.781 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.781 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0QwzqDb4Hq7b for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 17:03:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 119E61A018C for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 17:03:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from ([24.40.56.122]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.120231544; Fri, 07 Mar 2014 18:03:26 -0700 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.53]) by pacdcexhub05.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3d40:bdea:7266:7f5a%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 7 Mar 2014 20:03:54 -0500 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Owen DeLong , Alexandru Petrescu Thread-Topic: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations Thread-Index: AQHPOUa1pr85MHnBpE+CtMke73ba6prVKJOAgABm6ACAACNggIAAWkAA Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 01:03:26 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.247] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/eORtdxFGnUOi5JAUO93CknwLu0w Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 01:03:41 -0000 DQotLS0tLU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogT3dlbiBEZUxvbmcgPG93ZW5AZGVs b25nLmNvbT4NCkRhdGU6IEZyaWRheSwgTWFyY2ggNywgMjAxNCA5OjM3IEFNDQpUbzogQWxleGFu ZHJ1IFBldHJlc2N1IDxhbGV4YW5kcnUucGV0cmVzY3VAZ21haWwuY29tPg0KQ2M6IHY2b3BzIDx2 Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIE5QVDY2IGNvbW1lbnQgb24NCmRy YWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucw0KDQo+DQo+T24gTWFyIDYs IDIwMTQsIGF0IDExOjMwIFBNLCBBbGV4YW5kcnUgUGV0cmVzY3UNCj48YWxleGFuZHJ1LnBldHJl c2N1QGdtYWlsLmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6DQo+DQo+PiBMZSAwNy8wMy8yMDE0IDAyOjIyLCBNYXJrIFpa WiBTbWl0aCBhIMOpY3JpdCA6DQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4+IF9f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fIEZyb206IExvcmVuem8gQ29saXR0aQ0KPj4+ PiA8bG9yZW56b0Bnb29nbGUuY29tPiBUbzogInY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnIFdHIiA8djZvcHNAaWV0 Zi5vcmc+IFNlbnQ6DQo+Pj4+IEZyaWRheSwgNyBNYXJjaCAyMDE0IDE6MTYgQU0gU3ViamVjdDog W3Y2b3BzXSBOUFQ2NiBjb21tZW50IG9uDQo+Pj4+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdl LXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucw0KPj4+PiANCj4+Pj4gDQo+Pj4+IA0KPj4+PiBTZWN0aW9uIDMuMi4x IHNheXM7DQo+Pj4+IA0KPj4+PiBJbiBzb21lIHZlcnkgY29uc3RyYWluZWQgc2l0dWF0aW9ucyhm b3IgZXhhbXBsZSwgaW4gdGhlIHNlbnNvcnMpLA0KPj4+PiB0aGUgICBuZXR3b3JrIG5lZWRzIFVM QSBhcyB0aGUgb24tZGVtYW5kIGFuZCBzdGFibGUgYWRkcmVzc2luZw0KPj4+PiB3aGljaCAgIGRv ZXNuJ3QgbmVlZCBtdWNoIGNvZGUgdG8gc3VwcG9ydCBhZGRyZXNzIGFzc2lnbm1lbnQNCj4+Pj4g bWVjaGFuaXNtcyBsaWtlICAgREhDUCBvciBmdWxsIE5EIChOb3RlOiBzdXJlbHkgaXQgbmVlZHMg U0xBQUMpLiBJZg0KPj4+PiB0aGUgbmV0d29yayBhbHNvICAgbmVlZHMgdG8gY29ubmVjdCB0byB0 aGUgb3V0c2lkZSwgdGhlbiB0aGVyZSBjYW4NCj4+Pj4gYmUgYW4gTlBUdjYgZ2F0ZXdheSAgIHdo aWNoIGlzIG5vdCBzdWJqZWN0IHRvIGV4dHJlbWUgcmVzb3VyY2UNCj4+Pj4gY29uc3RyYWludHMu IEVzcGVjaWFsbHkgd2hlbiAgIGEgbGlnaHR3ZWlnaHQgaXNvbGF0ZWQgbmV0d29yayBuZWVkcw0K Pj4+PiB0byBhZGQgSW50ZXJuZXQgY29ubmVjdGl2aXR5LCAgIHRoaXMgaXMgcXVpdGUgYSBzdHJh aWdodGZvcndhcmQgYW5kDQo+Pj4+IGVmZmljaWVudCB3YXkuDQo+Pj4+IA0KPj4+PiANCj4+Pj4g SXQncyBub3QgY2xlYXIgd2hhdCBjb25zdHJhaW50cyBhcmUgcmVmZXJyZWQgdG8gaGVyZS4gSWYg dGhlIHNlbnNvcg0KPj4+PiBub2RlcyBhbHJlYWR5IHN1cHBvcnQgU0xBQUMsIHRoZW4gd2h5IGNh bid0IHRoZXkgc3VwcG9ydCBVTEErR1VBIGFzDQo+Pj4+IGRvY3VtZW50ZWQgaW4gc2VjdGlvbiAz LjIuMj8NCj4+Pj4gDQo+Pj4+IA0KPj4+PiBJcyB0aGlzIHNvbWV0aGluZyB3ZSB3YW50IHRvIHJl Y29tbWVuZD8NCj4+PiANCj4+PiBJIGRvbid0IHRoaW5rIGl0IGlzLiBJZiBhIG5vZGUgaXMgc28g cmVzb3VyY2UgY29uc3RyYWluZWQgdGhhdCBpdA0KPj4+IGNhbid0IHN1cHBvcnQgMyBJUHY2IHBy ZWZpeGVzIGluc3RlYWQgb2YgdHdvIChpLmUuLCBMTCArIFVMQSB2cyBMTCArDQo+Pj4gVUxBICsg R1VBKSwgdGhlbiBJJ2Qgd29uZGVyIGlmIGl0IGhhcyBlbm91Z2ggcmVzb3VyY2VzIHRvIHRvIHJ1 bg0KPj4+IGV2ZW4gYSBiYXNpYyBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbiB1c2VmdWxseS4NCj4+PiANCj4+PiBJZiBp dCBjYW4ndCBzdXBwb3J0IDMgSVB2NiBwcmVmaXhlcywgcGVyaGFwcyB0aGUgbm9kZSBzaG91bGRu J3QgYmUgYQ0KPj4+IGdlbmVyYWwgcHVycG9zZSBjb21wdXRlciB0aGF0IHN1cHBvcnRzIHJ1bm5p bmcgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIGxvY2FsbHkNCj4+PiBhdCBhbGwsIGJ1dCBzaG91bGQgaW5zdGVhZCBi ZSBhbiBpbnB1dCBvciBvdXRwdXQgZGV2aWNlIG9mIHNvbWUgZm9ybQ0KPj4+IHRoYXQgaXMgYXR0 YWNoZWQgdmlhIHNvbWV0aGluZyBtdWNoIHNpbXBsZXIgdGhhbiBJUHY2IHRvIGEgY29tcHV0ZXIN Cj4+PiB0aGF0IGRvZXMgcnVuIHRoZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgYW5kIGRvZXMgcnVuIElQdjYgd2Vs bCBlbm91Z2guDQo+PiANCj4+IEluIHRoaXMgZGlyZWN0aW9uLCBhIHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5IG1heSBi ZSB0byBtYWtlIElQdjYgYWRhcHQgdG8gdGhlDQo+PiBzaW1wbGVzdCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgb24g c3VjaCBub2RlczogbWF5YmUgb25seSB1c2Ugb25lIGFkZHJlc3MNCj4+IChwcmVzdW1hYmx5IFVM QSBvciBHVUEsIGJ1dCBub3QgTEwpLCBtYXliZSBsb3dlciB0aGUgUkZDMjQ2MCBtaW5pbWFsIE1U VQ0KPj4gdG8gNDFieXRlcyAoZnVsbCBiYXNlIGhlYWRlciBhbmQgMSBieXRlIG9mIGFwcCksIG1h eWJlIHJ1biBvbmx5IG9uZQ0KPj4gYXV0b2NvbmZpZyBwcm90b2NvbCAobm90IGJvdGggUkErREhD UCBhbmQgdGhhdCBsaW5rIGxheWVyJ3MgYXV0b2NvbmZpZyksDQo+PiBhbmQgc28gb24uDQo+DQo+ VGhpcyBtYWtlcyBubyBzZW5zZeKApiBUb28gbWFueSB0aGluZ3MgZGVwZW5kIG9uIExMIGFuZCBl bGltaW5hdGluZyBpdA0KPndvdWxkIGJlIGEgcHJldHR5IGZ1bmRhbWVudGFsIHJlZGVzaWduIG9m IHRoZSBwcm90b2NvbCBmdW5jdGlvbmFsaXR5Lg0KW2pqbWJdIEkgYWdyZWUgd2l0aCB0aGlzIHN0 YXRlbWVudCwgYW4gYWx0ZXJhdGlvbiBsaWtlIHRoaXMgd291bGQgYmUNCnNpZ25pZmljYW50Lg0K DQo+DQo+SSBkb27igJl0IHRoaW5rIHdlIG5lZWQgdG8gcmVkZXNpZ24gdGhlIHByb3RvY29sIGZv ciBzbWFsbCBub2Rlcy4gVGhlDQo+cmVhbGl0eSBpcw0KPnRoYXQgbm9ib2R5IGhhcyB5ZXQgY2xh aW1lZCBhbiBhY3R1YWwgbm9kZSB0aGF0IGNhbuKAmXQgaGFuZGxlIGEgdGhpcmQNCj5wcmVmaXgs DQo+dGhlcmUgaXMgbWVyZWx5IHNvbWUgbGV2ZWwgb2Ygc3BlY3VsYXRpb24gdGhhdCBzdWNoIGEg bm9kZSBtaWdodCBleGlzdC4NCltqam1iXSArMQ0KDQo+DQo+SXQgaXMgZXhwZWN0ZWQgdGhhdCBt b3N0IGNvbnN0cmFpbmVkIG5vZGVzIHdpbGwgcnVuIE5EL1NMQUFDIG9ubHkgYW5kDQo+d2lsbCBu b3Qgc3VwcG9ydA0KPkRIQ1B2Ni4gKHN1Y2ggbm9kZXMgYXJlbuKAmXQgbGlrZWx5IHRvIGJlIHJv dXRlcnMsIHNvIHRoZXkgc2hvdWxkIG5vdCBiZQ0KPnNlbmRpbmcNCj5SQXMpLg0KW2pqbWJdIHRo aXMgaGFzIGJlZW4gb3VyIGV4cGVyaWVuY2UuDQoNCj4NCj4+IEkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBV TEFzIGlzIG5vdCBwcmV2ZW50aW5nIGFueSBvZiB0aGVzZSwgYW5kIGlzIG5vdA0KPj4gbmVjZXNz YXJpbHkgaW52aXRpbmcgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBOUFQgLSBpdCBjb3VsZCB3b3JrIHdpdGggaXQsIG9y IG5vdC4NCj4NCj5JIHRoaW5rIGRvY3VtZW50aW5nIGEgY2FzZSBvZiBVTEErTlBUIGFzIGEgcmVj b21tZW5kZWQgb3Igc3RyYWlnaHQtZm9yd2FyZA0KPndheSBvZiBkb2luZyB0aGluZ3MgaXMgaWxs LWFkdmlzZWQuIFVMQSB3aXRob3V0IE5QVCBmb3IgbG9jYWwNCj5jb25uZWN0aXZpdHkgaXMgdG9s ZXJhYmxlLg0KPlVMQStHVUEgZm9yIHN0YWJsZSBsb2NhbCBjb25uZWN0aXZpdHkgd2l0aCB0cmFu c2llbnQgZ2xvYmFsIGNvbm5lY3Rpdml0eQ0KPmlzIHRvbGVyYWJsZS4NCj5QZXJzaXN0ZW50IEdV QSBpcyBiZXR0ZXIgZm9yIHRoZSB2YXN0IG1ham9yaXR5IG9mIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9ucy4NCj4NCj5V TEErTlBUIGlzIHNpbXBseSBhIHJlYWxseSBiYWQgaWRlYSBpbiB2aXJ0dWFsbHkgYW55IGNvbnRl eHQuDQo+DQo+PiBCdXQsIGlmIGFza2VkIHdoZXRoZXIgcHJlZmVycmluZyBhIFVMQSBhZGRyZXNz IG9uIHRoZSBzZW5zb3IsIG9yIGp1c3QNCj4+IHRoYXQgbGluayBsYXllcidzIGFkZHJlc3MsIEkn ZCBwcmVmZXIgdGhlIGZvcm1lciwgYmVjYXVzZSBpdCBoYXMgbGFyZ2VyDQo+PiBzY29wZSwgY291 bGQgYmUgcmVhY2hlZCBmcm9tIG1vcmUgcGxhY2VzLg0KPg0KPkkgZG9u4oCZdCB0aGluayB0aGlz IGlzIGEgcXVlc3Rpb24gb2YgZWl0aGVyL29yIGFuZCBJIHRoaW5rIHlvdSBhcmUNCj5jb25mbGF0 aW5nIHNldmVyYWwNCj5pc3N1ZXMgdGhhdCBhcmVu4oCZdCBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoaXMgdGhyZWFkIGFu ZCBwZXJoYXBzIG5vdCByZWFsbHkgcmVsYXRlZCB0bw0KPnRoaXMNCj5kb2N1bWVudCBpbnRvIHRo ZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uLg0KPg0KPk93ZW4NCj4+IA0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+djZvcHMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+djZvcHNAaWV0 Zi5vcmcNCj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Y2b3BzDQoNCg== From nobody Sat Mar 8 14:45:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65A381A0295 for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:07 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.068 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iCYbXrl8kzvp for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.68.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7323F1A01EE for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s28MiroK027510; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 22:44:54 GMT X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s28MiroK027510 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1394318694; bh=+FBLp/8ST4Y5sE/VDiPgOwMu2eA=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=yDKhg3YkYgMwnWg6+IKg1ALabOr/kCmFDgLAE8L7Ea0lyY6f58QJsvHO831Kyvu23 EMXBu19c/36esThj+owPAtL89J0rV1dZ9fov46BbAc+6SlqmOGqMbO36ZoImqSc5qY fosbWs/0gVBQY5zx+ktDjpzk3RAgMiphU1WhCN98= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q27Mir0546047913o3 ret-id none; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 22:44:54 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.108] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s28MiZ2h018955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 8 Mar 2014 22:44:35 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Tim Chown In-Reply-To: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 22:44:34 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> <837526E0-D133-4E64-A946-A22BBBB63924@ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q27Mir054604791300; tid=q27Mir0546047913o3; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=3:0; fails=0 X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s28MiroK027510 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Izp03jxbteuI01MepAKz37LqOcc Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 22:45:07 -0000 On 6 Mar 2014, at 14:48, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: > Le 06/03/2014 15:16, Lorenzo Colitti a =E9crit : >> Section 3.2.1 says; >>=20 >> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), the >> network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which >> doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like >> DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also >> needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway >> which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially >> when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet >> connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. >>=20 >> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. >=20 > I guess it is sensor constraints, not NPT-box constraints. By =93guess=94, do you mean you are reporting something you know first = hand here, or something you think might apply? In homenet-arch, we explictly say "neither IPv6 NAT or NPTv6 is = recommended for use in the homenet architecture=94, despite ULAs being = noted; it=92s assumed that an IPv6 node communicating externally will = have a GUA as well. The text also meantions that some devices, which may = include constrained devices, *might* only have a ULA, but hat would = imply internal-only communication. It may be good to clarify this in the = homenet text. Tim >=20 >> If the sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they >> support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? >>=20 >> Is this something we want to recommend? >=20 > I dont think it recommends, I think it observes, or it considers it a > 'quite' straightforward way. Should it say MAY instead? Or = 'attractive > way'? >=20 > Or should it add something else that NPT? (i.e. NAT). >=20 > Alex >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Sat Mar 8 15:41:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84DA21A02DB for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:41:46 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lSml6t8qxtgm for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:41:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from nm31.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm31.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.229.24]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 142681A02BE for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:41:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] by nm31.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Mar 2014 23:41:39 -0000 Received: from [98.138.100.112] by nm31.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Mar 2014 23:38:49 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.151] by tm103.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Mar 2014 23:38:49 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.193] by tm8.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Mar 2014 23:38:49 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1002.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 08 Mar 2014 23:38:49 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-4 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 134729.22657.bm@omp1002.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 83070 invoked by uid 60001); 8 Mar 2014 23:38:49 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com.au; s=s1024; t=1394321928; bh=udmTc0KeWm6/j45PonFyMF+vzi9X55m6KKWxtYxb6x0=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=inpmnnbmOk0u2fMPPLaNQqhmpVlCMjb93aL6xycM7cohexjfjPWLEeo59HkeOkmwgx60h7NeGoQroAys9P3nnR2ljtoLKCU50QgCOl3RHa8cJ0Clmwp3b+Uu5EftmBIe5InF+bAZbamzOXWGaDOKt28Ja8sQwo8kHqO1xTZaSuI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=4l3mONh45SeqjdB73XWzskjfQOhB2OsHhdL8MuKPRvH8e6GJCtK3CFRlUDu9V9PPIYd0fXazT6nvMcAe6D5B/qTFHD4V8Wt4V4JwplnUseWMDhDdOiD4LcXNOjXQxM/wdhN101WEW8kXLiOHyK7WTovkjVRfLAswxGUPgJvkJjc=; X-YMail-OSG: EICKZAcVM1m6noBZXR9lNgFuVYXcx2HKkhpQPcBdTEDTYZd TF8AjQI3201EKAP4Suk1ZOU7qeSdNTeCzxmpDD6NG7bkdhzUo2AzDmA.FZmM xfcnNTaxmpLy1cU1Yy3nmFjUXIPb7bPCB8V0QDeyc4_9W5Z1OKP2uOJ2PYja PPdltYo1qTfUz.7NtBpoBurlqvhBWm46kZfehfL4UVBSsIZSdYg2z.JufHJG rqAUrYe8PAQIjliWVsRI_B.7mO9XnU.3lgrJJ2Zx5bzfeCgh55IbzpN8lSS8 sB2Na1ClqyzrKAy9JizgBYtChr93VVVPhDFNqRINZKuzyuKLoA7Ek1jg8ahg syDDf8kn_.0lba.OEI9Ou_zaZAHI5VJFfv38Q5D4abTLjpmQkiOIyVtRwX7W xglwUkBUhzeSsaeUPkAyWhikkGBM6XMeaEBP0X7Hj6ZsUH.wxOwb3efaTH2z 7InaFonTNJpCBR0ignaPWHMEIjRwNC_9z4Ec5bFiH1zxbB0RliKtlQh1g61l OYR178XKIHBM1Grre0x.HhM5n0O3bOvBe8Avunop0iuOlgHqeB4nM9rCdRPW NCu4ReSkeOtU2jY.ykIj25okp50mw12XIx9y0 Received: from [150.101.221.237] by web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 15:38:48 PST X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgoKCi0tLS0tIE9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0KPiBGcm9tOiBPd2VuIERlTG9uZyA8b3dlbkBkZWxvbmcuY29tPgo.IFRvOiBBbGV4YW5kcnUgUGV0cmVzY3UgPGFsZXhhbmRydS5wZXRyZXNjdUBnbWFpbC5jb20.Cj4gQ2M6IE1hcmsgWlpaIFNtaXRoIDxtYXJrenp6c21pdGhAeWFob28uY29tLmF1PjsgTG9yZW56byBDb2xpdHRpIDxsb3JlbnpvQGdvb2dsZS5jb20.OyAidjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgV0ciIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4KPiBTZW50OiBGcmlkYXksIDcgTWFyY2ggMjAxNCA4OjM3IFBNCj4BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.177.636 References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> Message-ID: <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:38:48 -0800 (PST) From: Mark ZZZ Smith To: Owen DeLong , Alexandru Petrescu In-Reply-To: <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/JGmwrRLhbYnF44fu3Pu2GzKFV9w Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mark ZZZ Smith List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 23:41:46 -0000 =0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A> From: Owen DeLong =0A> To: Alexandru Petrescu =0A> Cc: Mar= k ZZZ Smith ; Lorenzo Colitti ; "v6ops@ietf.org WG" =0A> Sent: Friday, 7 March 2014 8:3= 7 PM=0A> Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-r= ecommendations=0A> =0A> =0A> On Mar 6, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Alexandru Petresc= u =0A> wrote:=0A> =0A>> Le 07/03/2014 02:22= , Mark ZZZ Smith a =C3=A9crit :=0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>> =0A>>>=C2=A0=0A= =C2=A0 =0A=0A=0A>> =0A>> In this direction, a possibility may be to = make IPv6 adapt to the=0A>> simplest applications on such nodes: maybe onl= y use one address=0A>> (presumably ULA or GUA, but not LL), maybe lower th= e RFC2460 minimal MTU=0A>> to 41bytes (full base header and 1 byte of app)= , maybe run only one=0A>> autoconfig protocol (not both RA+DHCP and that l= ink layer's =0A> autoconfig),=0A>> and so on.=0A> =0A> This makes no sense= =E2=80=A6 Too many things depend on LL and eliminating it=0A> would be a pr= etty fundamental redesign of the protocol functionality.=0A>=C2=A0=0A=0A+1= =0A=0A=0AI think the real value of LLs is, as per the IPv6 addressing archi= tecture, that all IPv6 interfaces are required to have Link-Local addresses= (RFC4291, 2.8). That means they're guaranteed to always available, and sho= uld be used within a link whenever possible, including for applications, be= cause they'll be the most reliable addresses to use, as they'll never go aw= ay by themselves (i.e., expire through aging). This is why they're supporte= d for applications in RFC4007, and are preferred over greater scope address= es in RFC6724.=0A=0AWhile routers announcing ULA or GUA prefixes are going = to be common, but I don't think should be necessary to have a router on a l= ink to just communicate between two directly attached hosts over IPv6.=C2= =A0=0A=0AIt seems that they're viewed by some people as unnecessary and unu= seful, just because the equivalent didn't really exist in IPv4. They are no= t a new idea, at least IPX and Appletalk also had "this network" prefixes. = They were also somewhat retrofitted into IPv4 via 169.254/16, so I think th= at shows that the idea of an "always there" prefix has been useful in a num= ber of scenarios.=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0ARegards,=0AMark. From nobody Sat Mar 8 15:56:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA141A02F1 for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:56:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.068 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yCXCNcpR5SLJ for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.68.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 174DA1A02F9 for ; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:56:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s28Ntd5g006511; Sat, 8 Mar 2014 23:55:39 GMT X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s28Ntd5g006511 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1394322947; bh=AAH3E2jzx4HDLiBGDux5z80oWIM=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=ckCZJNIkkhe1LUGqhFd3Z+h/2tnTwwUtJypMS4ZI9WWtTWLFC2JSdNXY+J4a8OTUY YjZZ9YCEXmGAqSLpsI5uvB44a8K9BwxDfxq3J3OWvkqBmvgTJL101nt0NbDxx20uRV FSGurodGRr1SQHbW6umwd26BDPzyq9qIa38BdfSM= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q27Nyd054604811504 ret-id none; Sat, 08 Mar 2014 23:55:47 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.108] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s28NsIHs029962 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 8 Mar 2014 23:54:18 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Tim Chown In-Reply-To: <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 23:54:17 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> To: Mark ZZZ Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q27Nyd054604811500; tid=q27Nyd054604811504; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0 X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s28Ntd5g006511 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/83WlKxKYJNh6iuvnVRpWals4XUI Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 23:56:07 -0000 On 8 Mar 2014, at 23:38, Mark ZZZ Smith = wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Owen DeLong >> To: Alexandru Petrescu >> Cc: Mark ZZZ Smith ; Lorenzo Colitti = ; "v6ops@ietf.org WG" >> Sent: Friday, 7 March 2014 8:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on = draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations >>=20 =85=85. >>=20 >> This makes no sense=85 Too many things depend on LL and eliminating = it >> would be a pretty fundamental redesign of the protocol functionality. >> =20 >=20 > +1 >=20 > I think the real value of LLs is, as per the IPv6 addressing = architecture, that all IPv6 interfaces are required to have Link-Local = addresses (RFC4291, 2.8). That means they're guaranteed to always = available, and should be used within a link whenever possible, including = for applications, because they'll be the most reliable addresses to use, = as they'll never go away by themselves (i.e., expire through aging). = This is why they're supported for applications in RFC4007, and are = preferred over greater scope addresses in RFC6724. >=20 > While routers announcing ULA or GUA prefixes are going to be common, = but I don't think should be necessary to have a router on a link to just = communicate between two directly attached hosts over IPv6.=20 Absolutely. And various zeroconf protocols are designed to work in such = environments using LLs. > It seems that they're viewed by some people as unnecessary and = unuseful, just because the equivalent didn't really exist in IPv4. They = are not a new idea, at least IPX and Appletalk also had "this network" = prefixes. They were also somewhat retrofitted into IPv4 via 169.254/16, = so I think that shows that the idea of an "always there" prefix has been = useful in a number of scenarios. I agree, and I recal 169.254 was added for zeroconf, but we=92re now = getting off topic a bit :) Tim >=20 >=20 > >=20 >=20 > Regards, > Mark. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Sun Mar 9 07:54:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C0E01A0368 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 07:54:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wLCYpbb1sv5C for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 07:54:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 805F31A0367 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 07:54:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s29EnO28029444 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Mar 2014 07:50:16 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s29EnO28029444 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394376616; bh=ESMWXJaQYS4rapfEJJ5O6X6jHnM=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=XqbLiDA6wIjmoSzUd0aEmeHl/I7IkSxJ/Bf/pXGyfNIO8P3MQ7pIPibxmD8l4jZni +5sua/Q5405h2HC6dKqRpImQ9pB1LXv7q/UN68H9PZEsDwQR328cCV0QnBvFW2/vpp 9FZ2sP43MPdeFGN6bQ0zZ9oNarcjkgTY1LoUfyNw= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 07:50:15 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9D9BF453-2E55-4D62-A105-46446B1E6DCA@delong.com> References: <53188AD5.6030602@gmail.com> <837526E0-D133-4E64-A946-A22BBBB63924@ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: Tim Chown X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Sun, 09 Mar 2014 07:50:16 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/sCqZmS8fp-m2xCkUUo8C6PBmpG0 Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 14:54:56 -0000 On Mar 8, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Tim Chown wrote: >=20 > On 6 Mar 2014, at 14:48, Alexandru Petrescu = wrote: >=20 >> Le 06/03/2014 15:16, Lorenzo Colitti a =E9crit : >>> Section 3.2.1 says; >>>=20 >>> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the sensors), = the >>> network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable addressing which >>> doesn't need much code to support address assignment mechanisms like >>> DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it needs SLAAC). If the network also >>> needs to connect to the outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway >>> which is not subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially >>> when a lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet >>> connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient way. >>>=20 >>> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. >>=20 >> I guess it is sensor constraints, not NPT-box constraints. >=20 > By =93guess=94, do you mean you are reporting something you know first = hand here, or something you think might apply? >=20 > In homenet-arch, we explictly say "neither IPv6 NAT or NPTv6 is = recommended for use in the homenet architecture=94, despite ULAs being = noted; it=92s assumed that an IPv6 node communicating externally will = have a GUA as well. The text also meantions that some devices, which may = include constrained devices, *might* only have a ULA, but hat would = imply internal-only communication. It may be good to clarify this in the = homenet text. I think the home net text has it right. I do not think that recommending = NPTv6 is a good idea. Owen From nobody Sun Mar 9 08:23:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D963A1A0268 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:23:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.538 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.538 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YXBsKglyWY59 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0D1B1A0265 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.10.1.61] ([66.171.184.130]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s29FIFtN030489 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:18:18 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s29FIFtN030489 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394378298; bh=69dsTABSU1nA3B4dlySA9Qz2azk=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=dS9hPFNSuUn152HvrgDn6DuvtChePdNABN322uo/Ad2fHIQS2tY3I2OHEUIpjsZnq DXsXGsCdniS15ECwKj4RjJGTGU9W6DqxdpylH80cxAGEzCt9wH5akLRRbP9hoFo75N b1O0echkLAu3e5VuxGiq1Q2JSNuqHDZ24tdWYvO0= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:17:53 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> To: Mark ZZZ Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Sun, 09 Mar 2014 08:18:18 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/qh6ZR1Fdx18RdWLonUo4QfUu6U0 Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 15:23:10 -0000 > It seems that they're viewed by some people as unnecessary and = unuseful, just because the equivalent didn't really exist in IPv4. They = are not a new idea, at least IPX and Appletalk also had "this network" = prefixes. They were also somewhat retrofitted into IPv4 via 169.254/16, = so I think that shows that the idea of an "always there" prefix has been = useful in a number of scenarios. There is a valid argument to be made that in IPv4, they did more harm = than good due to issues with the way they were cobbled into IPv4. Those = issues, while not present in IPv6, may taint people=92s perspectives = about them. Owen From nobody Sun Mar 9 10:06:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC4D1A02B2 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:06:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9qj03yMLR0Op for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D01331A02AD for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 10:06:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.134] ([172.56.14.127]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s29H6U0g046865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 9 Mar 2014 17:06:33 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <531C9F91.6000806@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 17:06:25 +0000 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:27.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/27.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Owen DeLong , Mark ZZZ Smith References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DbVoNEC6cFCDOdrf9ki0vkOG87vJCmQLA" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Sun, 09 Mar 2014 17:06:34 +0000 (UTC) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/cAqB8y4c7rS7Qzn1jYnVdKnPUqA Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 17:06:43 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --DbVoNEC6cFCDOdrf9ki0vkOG87vJCmQLA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/9/14, 3:17 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> It seems that they're viewed by some people as unnecessary and >> unuseful, just because the equivalent didn't really exist in IPv4. >> They are not a new idea, at least IPX and Appletalk also had "this >> network" prefixes. They were also somewhat retrofitted into IPv4 >> via 169.254/16, so I think that shows that the idea of an "always >> there" prefix has been useful in a number of scenarios. >=20 > There is a valid argument to be made that in IPv4, they did more harm > than good due to issues with the way they were cobbled into IPv4. > Those issues, while not present in IPv6, may taint people=92s > perspectives about them. no residential provider I've ever had from 1992 to present has ever delegated a v4 prefix large enough to number everything in my house let alone (in more recent times behind my phone. v4 link-local works after a fashion it's always been synonymous with either broken, or adhoc networking which is dandy until you put a router on the subnet. > Owen >=20 > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list=20 > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 --DbVoNEC6cFCDOdrf9ki0vkOG87vJCmQLA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlMcn5EACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrKr6wCdFWdptEQGhErFHannUTXpcCpB boMAnj1P0G5KWoPG70GUxqv4PRCgFDq1 =xWNZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DbVoNEC6cFCDOdrf9ki0vkOG87vJCmQLA-- From nobody Sun Mar 9 11:00:39 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C4B81A02B2 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -115.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-115.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WofbFbq8pmYD for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B620E1A028C for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=628; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1394388033; x=1395597633; h=date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc; bh=tXQGdQmB/L2YADhxoT4MtPUsmyoisvpojQEv0x+vZSc=; b=gH+lODkgd7HZGA5mTVXg6rVwXnIm33XxMNfRqjqHuIR6DOgK0bondrEf xnhVSkLJ0lMZ9GfNTSsR3cJt4Y6rmUQ4x3TnuRh65zWF6FKRHu4YqR0gy bYkOZG8753CqYKGm1nBknhPLrKsp5rrMOFgepBGhFLjg2pmotFmzzIPkO U=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlYGALWrHFOtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABagwY7q3QBlhiBDBZ0gyU8NIhZAQ3PIBeOWx2EIgSJUZAmkHuDTQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,619,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="308870029" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Mar 2014 18:00:32 +0000 Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (irp-view13.cisco.com [171.70.120.60]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s29I0VOX019738 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 9 Mar 2014 18:00:32 GMT Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s29I0OY0001317; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fred@localhost) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id s29I0Nmx001211; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 11:00:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Fred Baker Message-Id: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> To: v6ops@ietf.org Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yZQ1uc94DtlfQNrYkUxzDj4M8VY Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 18:00:39 -0000 This is to initiate a two week working group last call of http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt. Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the list. We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the document as well as its content. If you have read the document and believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important comment to make. From nobody Sun Mar 9 12:13:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B92C1A02B4 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:13:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.068 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.068 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cCwEaGLrEC37 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:13:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [152.78.68.146]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 051511A02B7 for ; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:12:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s29JC8rx032337; Sun, 9 Mar 2014 19:12:12 GMT X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s29JC8rx032337 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1394392338; bh=On2sCAmjqW5rFWYNf9vAvNcVjtA=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=BOgBNxUrMIkkv9VEtPS/DcSe2OOD84jAQ1XOtC/sIKFBoz3aUVMpAOX86KpDh0iK3 PKz1A5z0/ZLS2wzSMTfYvBrAfcf6IcCbuKn73tUctR3MmsCAvX1ZAVk/b3JbkKTTFc POVX+Cf/ovmBLKosLmR2+tkweU8k0P34iKOC4nmY= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25d]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q28JC80546051746NV ret-id none; Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:12:18 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.108] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s29JBoc6024153 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 9 Mar 2014 19:11:51 GMT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Tim Chown In-Reply-To: <531C9F91.6000806@bogus.com> Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 19:11:52 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <1394321928.4203.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <531C9F91.6000806@bogus.com> To: joel jaeggli X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q28JC8054605174600; tid=q28JC80546051746NV; client=relay,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0 X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s29JC8rx032337 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/D0eHwKWuiKmo8q7PLVxDQj4CoiU Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2014 19:13:03 -0000 On 9 Mar 2014, at 17:06, joel jaeggli wrote: > On 3/9/14, 3:17 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> It seems that they're viewed by some people as unnecessary and >>> unuseful, just because the equivalent didn't really exist in IPv4. >>> They are not a new idea, at least IPX and Appletalk also had "this >>> network" prefixes. They were also somewhat retrofitted into IPv4 >>> via 169.254/16, so I think that shows that the idea of an "always >>> there" prefix has been useful in a number of scenarios. >>=20 >> There is a valid argument to be made that in IPv4, they did more harm >> than good due to issues with the way they were cobbled into IPv4. >> Those issues, while not present in IPv6, may taint people=92s >> perspectives about them. >=20 > no residential provider I've ever had from 1992 to present has ever > delegated a v4 prefix large enough to number everything in my house = let > alone (in more recent times behind my phone. Ironically the most well-known native IPv6 ISP in the UK also (until = recently I believe) gave a /28 IPv4 prefix for residential customers. I = don=92t know where your house is though on the scale of "typical home = network" to "House Arkko"... > v4 link-local works after a fashion it's always been synonymous with > either broken, or adhoc networking which is dandy until you put a = router > on the subnet. Well, I=92ve always thought of IPv4 LL as being intended for = non-connected networks, with devices only having the LL. As you say = though it=92s probably most often seen due to broken IPv4 DHCP. A key = difference with v6 is you have both LL and global.=20 Tim >=20 >=20 >> Owen >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list=20 >> v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Mon Mar 10 10:46:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313071A0651 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:46:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.383 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.383 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id grdjh3p30Q_Y for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:46:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr (sainfoin-out.extra.cea.fr [132.167.192.145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 206D91A0365 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (pisaure.intra.cea.fr [132.166.88.21]) by sainfoin.extra.cea.fr (8.14.2/8.14.2/CEAnet-Internet-out-2.3) with ESMTP id s2AHkAeQ030796; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:46:10 +0100 Received: from pisaure.intra.cea.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id ADE3A206845; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:47:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from muguet1.intra.cea.fr (muguet1.intra.cea.fr [132.166.192.6]) by pisaure.intra.cea.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D9842067F9; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:47:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (is010446-4.intra.cea.fr [10.8.33.116]) by muguet1.intra.cea.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8/CEAnet-Intranet-out-1.2) with ESMTP id s2AHk9Xw027207; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:46:10 +0100 Message-ID: <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 18:46:09 +0100 From: Alexandru Petrescu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Owen DeLong References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/4tUuo4kGIz7siGzVgDP2bKXigEo Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 17:46:24 -0000 Le 07/03/2014 10:37, Owen DeLong a écrit : > > On Mar 6, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Alexandru Petrescu > wrote: > >> Le 07/03/2014 02:22, Mark ZZZ Smith a écrit : >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> ________________________________ From: Lorenzo Colitti >>>> To: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" >>>> Sent: Friday, 7 March 2014 1:16 AM Subject: [v6ops] NPT66 >>>> comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Section 3.2.1 says; >>>> >>>> In some very constrained situations(for example, in the >>>> sensors), the network needs ULA as the on-demand and stable >>>> addressing which doesn't need much code to support address >>>> assignment mechanisms like DHCP or full ND (Note: surely it >>>> needs SLAAC). If the network also needs to connect to the >>>> outside, then there can be an NPTv6 gateway which is not >>>> subject to extreme resource constraints. Especially when a >>>> lightweight isolated network needs to add Internet >>>> connectivity, this is quite a straightforward and efficient >>>> way. >>>> >>>> >>>> It's not clear what constraints are referred to here. If the >>>> sensor nodes already support SLAAC, then why can't they >>>> support ULA+GUA as documented in section 3.2.2? >>>> >>>> >>>> Is this something we want to recommend? >>> >>> I don't think it is. If a node is so resource constrained that it >>> can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes instead of two (i.e., LL + ULA vs >>> LL + ULA + GUA), then I'd wonder if it has enough resources to to >>> run even a basic application usefully. >>> >>> If it can't support 3 IPv6 prefixes, perhaps the node shouldn't >>> be a general purpose computer that supports running applications >>> locally at all, but should instead be an input or output device >>> of some form that is attached via something much simpler than >>> IPv6 to a computer that does run the applications and does run >>> IPv6 well enough. >> >> In this direction, a possibility may be to make IPv6 adapt to the >> simplest applications on such nodes: maybe only use one address >> (presumably ULA or GUA, but not LL), maybe lower the RFC2460 >> minimal MTU to 41bytes (full base header and 1 byte of app), maybe >> run only one autoconfig protocol (not both RA+DHCP and that link >> layer's autoconfig), and so on. > > This makes no sense… Too many things depend on LL and eliminating it > would be a pretty fundamental redesign of the protocol > functionality. Whereas I agree with the necessity of LL in other contexts where it is currently overlooked, I think much of the LL need is from ND, MLD an DHCP. I think none of them is mandatory by specification (i.e. no spec requires a node to implement e.g. ND). It must not be because of too heavy protocol functionality that the simplest of the nodes do not respond to ping6. Ping6 is a very simple functionality whose most complex requirement is in the checksum calculation, that's all. And, given a choice between LL and other scope address, one would prefer other scope address because it is inevitably larger. > I don’t think we need to redesign the protocol for small nodes. I fully agree. I do not talk of redesign of new protocol, but eliminate the parts which are in the way. It's like when running IP over SLIP. > The reality is that nobody has yet claimed an actual node that can’t > handle a third prefix, there is merely some level of speculation > that such a node might exist. Right. There are very many Bluetooth nodes out there which are very powerful and dont have IP on them at all. But there are many other nodes out there on which nobody puts IP because they think IP is too heavy. This is again a matter of formulation and people should understand it. There are differences between saying that a constrained node can accept a GUA, a ULA, or can run with both, and that it is unacceptable to say that because GUA works ULA is not needed. > It is expected that most constrained nodes will run ND/SLAAC only > and will not support DHCPv6. (such nodes aren’t likely to be routers, > so they should not be sending RAs). I beg to differ. Many if not most of these nodes in sensor networks are supposed to be actually routers. >> I think the use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not >> necessarily inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, or >> not. > > I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as a recommended or > straight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. ULA without NPT > for local connectivity is tolerable. Yes, but not the 'ill' part. Maybe just advised in some context not others. > ULA+GUA for stable local connectivity with transient global > connectivity is tolerable. > Persistent GUA is better for the vast > majority of applications. I am not sure this is as clear as you writ eit. I just dont see any mentioning of Mobile IP or route updates, which are quintessential to realize what you say. > ULA+NPT is simply a really bad idea in virtually any context. Disagree. It is a good idea in many contexts at the edge. It is a good idea for the smartphone-and-single-subnet use-case (like in tethering, mobile hotspot). But it is inadequate for a vehicle where are several subnets and still a single /64 is given to it. >> But, if asked whether preferring a ULA address on the sensor, or >> just that link layer's address, I'd prefer the former, because it >> has larger scope, could be reached from more places. > > I don’t think this is a question of either/or and I think you are > conflating several issues that aren’t part of this thread and > perhaps not really related to this document into the discussion. I agree. It is not me who conflates. You got here NPT mixed in, and simultaneous or alternative uses of ULA/GUA. I could add many more if I wanted (NAT, Mobile IP, DHCP PD, 64share, route updates) but I restrain for the benefit of focusing. In all cases, it is unacceptable to not recommend ULA in certain contexts, mostly at the edge. People who think core networks have different perspectives than people who think networks at the far edge, like the network of sensors you build on a table disconnected from anything else at the first time. Try to build one, and picture is clearer. What prefix to put on these sensors? Ask the admin. The admin says some prefix but _only_ if connected at point X, otherwise dont put that GUA. Mobile IP? Too heavy at this time, just I need some address to put there. This is the essence of ULA reasoning. Alex > > Owen >> > > > From nobody Mon Mar 10 12:08:35 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342661A06BF for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:08:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Dsu64MXZHrFc for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CB3B1A04F1 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:08:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2620::930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024] ([IPv6:2620:0:930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2AJ6Y5R003717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:06:34 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2AJ6Y5R003717 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394478396; bh=1h8T3khqjdcRNDHWfpUTukbtkdM=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=dhgh5g3vd2sMVqUkPE3sjeXLiOWndn3jwIyLqvlOgX1A4AOx8q7rHzn9AXafOhHme h2dKFLOUslWB1DDpkoD3x9aI/g3P7qpOgvQ2xBYa1WSSB/euLEzVIzSPb68M7kK/6D tQfCtp48pv3De4ahqPEIzjhDvDvb8Dh/CY3zOttU= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_3C5A05DE-6774-46B1-8039-B03DA331317C" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:06:14 -0700 Message-Id: <8B8D3417-4331-448E-B518-059BF003E3A3@delong.com> References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> To: Alexandru Petrescu X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:06:36 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/CVdYAZEDsrj0cXJIJYlz3R6bMsw Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:08:32 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_3C5A05DE-6774-46B1-8039-B03DA331317C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 >>=20 >> This makes no sense=85 Too many things depend on LL and eliminating = it >> would be a pretty fundamental redesign of the protocol >> functionality. >=20 > Whereas I agree with the necessity of LL in other contexts where it is > currently overlooked, I think much of the LL need is from ND, MLD an > DHCP. I think none of them is mandatory by specification (i.e. no = spec > requires a node to implement e.g. ND). I don't think that ND is optional, but I could be wrong. How would you = expect a node that is not on a point-to-point link to function without ND? LL is also required for DAD, OSPF, and many other processes. Much of = IPv6 assumes that if an interface does not have an LL address, it is not = running IPv6. > It must not be because of too heavy protocol functionality that the > simplest of the nodes do not respond to ping6. Ping6 is a very simple > functionality whose most complex requirement is in the checksum > calculation, that's all. >=20 > And, given a choice between LL and other scope address, one would = prefer other scope address because it is inevitably larger. I no of no IPv6 implementation where a node can support only a single = address. I do not believe any conforming implementation can limit an = interface to a single address, though I believe there is no specified = minimum number of addresses supported. >> I don=92t think we need to redesign the protocol for small nodes. >=20 > I fully agree. I do not talk of redesign of new protocol, but = eliminate > the parts which are in the way. It's like when running IP over SLIP. I do not for one second believe that LL or multiple address requirements = are in the way. Do you have an example of an actual implementation where = this is an issue? So far, all we've heard is speculation about = "constrained nodes" that "might exist" which "might have a problem with = 2 or more global scoped addresses at the same time". Absent evidence that such an issue really exists in the real world, I am = very hesitant to go through any of the gyrations you have suggested as I = believe they would be more harmful than useful. >=20 >> The reality is that nobody has yet claimed an actual node that can=92t >> handle a third prefix, there is merely some level of speculation >> that such a node might exist. >=20 > Right. >=20 > There are very many Bluetooth nodes out there which are very powerful > and dont have IP on them at all. >=20 > But there are many other nodes out there on which nobody puts IP = because > they think IP is too heavy. >=20 > This is again a matter of formulation and people should understand it. >=20 > There are differences between saying that a constrained node can = accept > a GUA, a ULA, or can run with both, and that it is unacceptable to say = that because GUA works ULA is not needed. I'm quite certain that I do not understand your point here. >> It is expected that most constrained nodes will run ND/SLAAC only >> and will not support DHCPv6. (such nodes aren=92t likely to be = routers, >> so they should not be sending RAs). >=20 > I beg to differ. Many if not most of these nodes in sensor networks = are supposed to be actually routers. A node which is supposed to be a router should not be so resource = constrained. Building a router which is so resource constrained as to be = unable to handle multiple addresses on one of its interfaces is absurd = as you will need much more resources than what would support that = requirement to support other things in the router like the neighbor = table, timer tables, routing tables, etc. >>> I think the use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not >>> necessarily inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, or >>> not. >>=20 >> I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as a recommended or >> straight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. ULA without NPT >> for local connectivity is tolerable. >=20 > Yes, but not the 'ill' part. Maybe just advised in some context not = others. No, it is utterly and completely ill-advised in any context. It is not straight forward. It is harmful. If you need global = reachability, you should be using GUA on the node. Silly NPT games = degrade service in all cases where they are applied. NPT may be convenient for some operators in some contexts for some = amount of time, but in all such cases, they produce corresponding harm = and come at a price which may not be paid by the implementer. (c.f. = toxic polluter model) >> ULA+GUA for stable local connectivity with transient global >> connectivity is tolerable. >> Persistent GUA is better for the vast >> majority of applications. >=20 > I am not sure this is as clear as you writ eit. I just dont see any = mentioning of Mobile IP or route updates, which are quintessential to = realize what you say. Mobile IP is all about preserving stable GUA on a host, so I'm not sure = how you can say that what I have said above does not align completely = with Mobile IP. Route updates are, generally, about providing new information about how = to reach GUA, so, again, I don't see how what I have proposed is not = clearly aligned with that goal. >> ULA+NPT is simply a really bad idea in virtually any context. >=20 > Disagree. It is a good idea in many contexts at the edge. Name one. > It is a good idea for the smartphone-and-single-subnet use-case (like = in tethering, mobile hotspot). But it is inadequate for a vehicle where = are several subnets and still a single /64 is given to it. No, it is not. It provides no benefit whatsoever vs. simply delivering = GUA to the subnet instead. >>> But, if asked whether preferring a ULA address on the sensor, or >>> just that link layer's address, I'd prefer the former, because it >>> has larger scope, could be reached from more places. >>=20 >> I don=92t think this is a question of either/or and I think you are >> conflating several issues that aren=92t part of this thread and >> perhaps not really related to this document into the discussion. >=20 > I agree. >=20 > It is not me who conflates. >=20 > You got here NPT mixed in, and simultaneous or alternative uses of = ULA/GUA. That is the topic of the discussion from the beginning. > I could add many more if I wanted (NAT, Mobile IP, DHCP PD, 64share, = route updates) but I restrain for the benefit of focusing. >=20 > In all cases, it is unacceptable to not recommend ULA in certain = contexts, mostly at the edge. I'm not saying we can't recommend ULA in certain cases. I am saying that recommending NPT or any other form of NAT should be = avoided. > People who think core networks have different perspectives than people = who think networks at the far edge, like the network of sensors you = build on a table disconnected from anything else at the first time. Try = to build one, and picture is clearer. What prefix to put on these = sensors? Ask the admin. The admin says some prefix but _only_ if = connected at point X, otherwise dont put that GUA. Mobile IP? Too = heavy at this time, just I need some address to put there. This is the = essence of ULA reasoning. I have built several. My picture is quite clear, I assure you. I have = used ULA and/or LL for such networks. OTOH, when I connect those sensors = to a larger network, I do NOT leave them with ULA or LL only. I add GUA = and that makes things work.=20 GUA for these sensors can be flash-renumbered very quickly without = impact if the network is designed correctly. Having the GUA change when = the connectivity changes is not a problem for such networks. They can = preserve stable ULA in addition for functions where this is useful. I = don't oppose that. What I do oppose is using NPT instead of delivering = the GUA to the nodes in question. Doing so is absurd and harmful. Owen --Apple-Mail=_3C5A05DE-6774-46B1-8039-B03DA331317C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252

This makes no sense=85 Too many = things depend on LL and eliminating it
would be a pretty fundamental = redesign of the protocol
functionality.

Whereas I = agree with the necessity of LL in other contexts where it = is
currently overlooked, I think much of the LL need is from ND, MLD = an
DHCP.  I think none of them is mandatory by specification = (i.e. no spec
requires a node to implement e.g. = ND).

I don't think that ND is = optional, but I could be wrong. How would you expect
a node = that is not on a point-to-point link to function without = ND?

LL is also required for DAD, OSPF, and many = other processes. Much of IPv6
assumes that if an interface = does not have an LL address, it is not running = IPv6.

It must not be = because of too heavy protocol functionality that the
simplest of the = nodes do not respond to ping6.  Ping6 is a very = simple
functionality whose most complex requirement is in the = checksum
calculation, that's all.

And, given a choice between = LL and other scope address, one would prefer other scope address because = it is inevitably larger.

I no of no = IPv6 implementation where a node can support only a single address. I do = not believe any conforming implementation can limit an interface to a = single address, though I believe there is no specified minimum number of = addresses supported.

I don=92t think we need to redesign the = protocol for small nodes.

I fully agree.  I do = not talk of redesign of new protocol, but eliminate
the parts which = are in the way.  It's like when running IP over = SLIP.

I do not for one second = believe that LL or multiple address requirements are in the way. Do you = have an example of an actual implementation where this is an issue? So = far, all we've heard is speculation about "constrained nodes" that = "might exist" which "might have a problem with 2 or more global scoped = addresses at the same time".

Absent evidence = that such an issue really exists in the real world, I am very hesitant = to go through any of the gyrations you have suggested as I believe they = would be more harmful than useful.


The = reality is that nobody has yet claimed an actual node that = can=92t
handle a third prefix, there is merely some level of = speculation
that such a node might = exist.

Right.

There are very many Bluetooth = nodes out there which are very powerful
and dont have IP on them at = all.

But there are many other nodes out there on which nobody = puts IP because
they think IP is too heavy.

This is again a = matter of formulation and people should understand it.

There are = differences between saying that a constrained node can accept
a GUA, = a ULA, or can run with both, and that it is unacceptable to say that = because GUA works ULA is not = needed.

I'm quite certain that I do = not understand your point here.

It is = expected that most constrained nodes will run ND/SLAAC only
and will = not support DHCPv6. (such nodes aren=92t likely to be routers,
so = they should not be sending RAs).

I beg to differ. =  Many if not most of these nodes in sensor networks are supposed to = be actually routers.

A node which = is supposed to be a router should not be so resource constrained. = Building a router which is so resource constrained as to be unable to = handle multiple addresses on one of its interfaces is absurd as you will = need much more resources than what would support that requirement to = support other things in the router like the neighbor table, timer = tables, routing tables, etc.

I think the = use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not
necessarily = inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, = or
not.

I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as = a recommended or
straight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. = ULA without NPT
for local connectivity is = tolerable.

Yes, but not the 'ill' part.  Maybe = just advised in some context not = others.

No, it is utterly and = completely ill-advised in any context.

It is = not straight forward. It is harmful. If you need global reachability, = you should be using GUA on the node. Silly NPT games degrade service in = all cases where they are applied.

NPT may be = convenient for some operators in some contexts for some amount of time, = but in all such cases, they produce corresponding harm and come at a = price which may not be paid by the implementer. (c.f. toxic polluter = model)

ULA+GUA for stable local connectivity with transient = global
connectivity is tolerable.
Persistent GUA is better for the = vast
majority of applications.

I am not sure this = is as clear as you writ eit.  I just dont see any mentioning of = Mobile IP or route updates, which are quintessential to realize what you = say.

Mobile IP is all about = preserving stable GUA on a host, so I'm not sure how you can say that = what I have said above does not align completely with Mobile = IP.

Route updates are, generally, about = providing new information about how to reach GUA, so, again, I don't see = how what I have proposed is not clearly aligned with that = goal.

ULA+NPT is simply a really bad idea in virtually any = context.

Disagree.  It is a good idea in many = contexts at the edge.

Name = one.

It is a good = idea for the smartphone-and-single-subnet use-case (like in tethering, = mobile hotspot).  But it is inadequate for a vehicle where are = several subnets and still a single /64 is given to = it.

No, it is not. It provides no = benefit whatsoever vs. simply delivering GUA to the subnet = instead.

But, if asked whether preferring = a ULA address on the sensor, or
just that link layer's address, I'd = prefer the former, because it
has larger scope, could be reached from = more places.

I don=92t think this is a question of = either/or and I think you are
conflating several issues that aren=92t = part of this thread and
perhaps not really related to this document = into the discussion.

I agree.

It is not me = who conflates.

You got here NPT mixed in, and simultaneous or = alternative uses of ULA/GUA.

That = is the topic of the discussion from the = beginning.

I = could add many more if I wanted (NAT, Mobile IP, DHCP PD, 64share, route = updates) but I restrain for the benefit of focusing.

In all = cases, it is unacceptable to not recommend ULA in certain contexts, = mostly at the edge.

I'm not saying = we can't recommend ULA in certain cases.

I am = saying that recommending NPT or any other form of NAT should be = avoided.

People who = think core networks have different perspectives than people who think = networks at the far edge, like the network of sensors you build on a = table disconnected from anything else at the first time.  Try to = build one, and picture is clearer.  What prefix to put on these = sensors?  Ask the admin.  The admin says some prefix  but = _only_ if connected at point X, otherwise dont put that GUA. =  Mobile IP?  Too heavy at this time, just I need some address = to put there.  This is the essence of ULA = reasoning.

I have built several. My = picture is quite clear, I assure you. I have used ULA and/or LL for such = networks. OTOH, when I connect those sensors to a larger network, I do = NOT leave them with ULA or LL only. I add GUA and that makes things = work. 

GUA for these sensors can be = flash-renumbered very quickly without impact if the network is designed = correctly. Having the GUA change when the connectivity changes is not a = problem for such networks. They can preserve stable ULA in addition for = functions where this is useful. I don't oppose that. What I do oppose is = using NPT instead of delivering the GUA to the nodes in question. Doing = so is absurd and = harmful.

Owen

= --Apple-Mail=_3C5A05DE-6774-46B1-8039-B03DA331317C-- From nobody Mon Mar 10 12:49:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B7FE1A04C2 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:49:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rCk5i8a9AL40 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:49:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFBC51A058E for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 12:49:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 281C0211DF for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from web1 ([10.202.2.211]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:49:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:from:to:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:subject:date:in-reply-to :references; s=smtpout; bh=bWdO25XODf+pdhYFIJNGyTlRhfw=; b=CSn90 T90qJfi82UbkyBSNJw+S4bJ/Rif/yfOE5LBaL5Hg62Tqo4u4IDltfDmmylo6vmHO Em2ugt+Rol8iKeDE7wvpVCcRmRIh+xcrm7/mNOWnZ1Q1vt0+eE3kerNUEueBYbQB TLjbEDva/6FZ0G2VnEt3Z8350DlFvdpY6HyP/g= Received: by web1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99) id EDE13F00C94; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:49:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <1394480973.23375.92822809.7750FCFA@webmail.messagingengine.com> X-Sasl-Enc: C3eFN0EPC7jcMuhwMAvqge0Xk6gFg9jHVPxb4it7CeY3 1394480973 From: William Cerveny To: v6ops@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-4527a23f Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 15:49:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20140214091302.13219.20624.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <20140214091302.13219.20624.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/HqzlGwOlGq9GcYLx7frfRTo0NIk Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:49:52 -0000 Posting onto the list with what I said at the v6ops meeting on Thursday: I=E2=80=99ve been using a ULA in a test lab for perhaps 6 years. They work= fine and serve our requirement for having a block of addresses that can be routed within the test lab at a single location. It is possible that at some point we will want to route with a different test lab, for which we wouldn=E2=80=99t want this traffic to leave either test lab. We aren=E2=80= =99t routing the traffic outside of the test lab and for our application it is undesirable for our test traffic left the test lab. I can think of two situations where ULAs would be more valuable in =E2=80=9Cisolated=E2=80=9D networks than GUAs would be: 1) We don=E2=80=99t ever want the traffic addressed with ULAs to leave the = test network. If we addressed with a GUA, it would be easier for the traffic to be accidentally routed outside the test lab (I think Fred spelled out this scenario). 2) There may be administratively complex or prohibitive challenges in acquiring GUAs for specific projects. If one were to need addresses (other than link-local addresses) for a small isolated network an assigned GUA is unavailable, it could be desirable to use a ULA instead of random address space. Bill Cerveny On Fri, Feb 14, 2014, at 05:13 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the > IETF. >=20 > Title : Recommendations of Using Unique Local Addresses > Authors : Bing Liu > Sheng Jiang > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt > Pages : 15 > Date : 2014-02-14 >=20 > Abstract: > This document provides guidance of how to use ULAs. It analyzes ULA > usage scenarios and recommends use cases where ULA addresses might be > beneficially used. >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendatio= ns/ >=20 > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02 >=20 > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendat= ions-02 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Mon Mar 10 14:03:12 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A6061A04E9 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:03:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NzSClQ6ISaJ2 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB1231A04A6 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:03:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.5.16.62] (adsl-69-228-92-192.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [69.228.92.192]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2AL1kZp012377 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:01:48 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2AL1kZp012377 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394485308; bh=VKWZ6Zo9gha8xtWqjRXJSuej8/E=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=FZJHflVoihFb7836BgqQLQ93W8Y7zmpuNl2Mrrt35ZprimIOM1/6AIAqW5uUd6bhn XnyW9AgkPAyQ40aqLPRlz63JOyN0NQ8M4p+FkZjPW2rzCidcrlNnn4fbm5+CXb9dee xlTAl5HByWsNqD4iDBp2cOBMN+w/b0YcT+4yzeTQ= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1394480973.23375.92822809.7750FCFA@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:01:45 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <1F66965A-3C60-4B97-A8C7-90BB9D054F5F@delong.com> References: <20140214091302.13219.20624.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1394480973.23375.92822809.7750FCFA@webmail.messagingengine.com> To: William Cerveny X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:01:48 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/GQvvrrq9q0F6tdMrMn5rMZdbJCs Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:03:06 -0000 On Mar 10, 2014, at 12:49 PM, William Cerveny = wrote: > Posting onto the list with what I said at the v6ops meeting on = Thursday: >=20 > I=92ve been using a ULA in a test lab for perhaps 6 years. They work = fine > and serve our requirement for having a block of addresses that can be > routed within the test lab at a single location. It is possible that = at > some point we will want to route with a different test lab, for which = we > wouldn=92t want this traffic to leave either test lab. We aren=92t = routing > the traffic outside of the test lab and for our application it is > undesirable for our test traffic left the test lab. >=20 > I can think of two situations where ULAs would be more valuable in > =93isolated=94 networks than GUAs would be: > 1) We don=92t ever want the traffic addressed with ULAs to leave the = test > network. If we addressed with a GUA, it would be easier for the = traffic > to be accidentally routed outside the test lab (I think Fred spelled = out > this scenario). It might be easier for this to occur over a wider area of routing, but, = I do not believe that it is any easier to accidentally route GUA = somewhere than it is to accidentally route ULA there. I will agree that it will be more obviously visible in the routing table = if such were to occur, but the ability to misconfigure a router does not = change simply by using ULA addresses. > 2) There may be administratively complex or prohibitive challenges in > acquiring GUAs for specific projects. If one were to need addresses > (other than link-local addresses) for a small isolated network an > assigned GUA is unavailable, it could be desirable to use a ULA = instead > of random address space. I agree that in all cases where GUA is unavailable, ULA is a preferred = alternative. However, I will point out that the policies for obtaining GUA have been = made very liberal and easy in most RIRs and that the requirements are = barely above =93I have a network I want to number with IPv6 addresses. = Please assign me a prefix. Kthxbye.=94 IMHO, this is desirable. My point is that we should avoid recommending ULA+NPT for hosts that are = communicating to the outside world because NPT and all other forms of = NAT should be considered harmful. Owen >=20 > Bill Cerveny >=20 > On Fri, Feb 14, 2014, at 05:13 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the >> IETF. >>=20 >> Title : Recommendations of Using Unique Local = Addresses >> Authors : Bing Liu >> Sheng Jiang >> Filename : = draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt >> Pages : 15 >> Date : 2014-02-14 >>=20 >> Abstract: >> This document provides guidance of how to use ULAs. It analyzes ULA >> usage scenarios and recommends use cases where ULA addresses might = be >> beneficially used. >>=20 >>=20 >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> = https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendation= s/ >>=20 >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> = http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02 >>=20 >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> = http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendati= ons-02 >>=20 >>=20 >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Mon Mar 10 14:13:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6670F1A0666 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:13:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MJDsLyMtI1ke for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 103941A065B for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.5.16.62] (adsl-69-228-92-192.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [69.228.92.192]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2AL7NAf012602 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:07:33 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2AL7NAf012602 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1394485664; bh=CYvdvoIuaH5jeoAkXVhT86TI31E=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=xPNVKXihTYUxPN+EBbWVv3lJsXhM1u3tkqMNgutMZmdZuk2A+ZO5pdsREBaIlyxmQ 9S8QJguxFIW/7itfwUQboF1oVnsC2Fwbqgl1ImbkQIKHnchAlN2ReQKHf4NuXRGCME BfDaNkicIFFZkbHTcK41QrHfMYUkKQlhSGEp8BOk= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <576047A5-FFAC-4541-97A8-D90DE720CBA6@magma.ca> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:07:22 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <576047A5-FFAC-4541-97A8-D90DE720CBA6@magma.ca> To: Philip Matthews X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 10 Mar 2014 14:07:44 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/J523FIdmvAd3cHe8SRwUgolnLrU Cc: v6ops list Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:13:49 -0000 Section 2.1 It might also be worth addressing that the sometimes perceived = disadvantage of combining IPv4/IPv6 on the same link of generating = additional link utilization is not an issue in most case as the vast = majority of cases where IPv6 bandwidth utilization increases show a = corresponding decrease in IPv4 utilization by the same host.=20 I don=92t disagree with the conclusion drawn, but I spend quite a bit of = time debunking this argument among people who are new to IPv6. Section 2.2 The claim that "it is not possible to identify the interface or link (in = a database, email, etc.) just by giving its address=94 seems specious to = me. Unless you have a problem of duplicate MAC addresses or overlapping = LL addresses within your network (generally you should not), the LL = address is an adequate unique identifier. Further, I am unconvinced that it is =93difficult-to-impossible=94 to = implement DNS names for LL addresses. While it is true that LL ip6.arpa = zones are very localized in scope, an organization wishing to do so = could maintain an organization-wide central registry of LL addresses and = corresponding ip6.arpa entries without great difficulty if they chose to = do so. An additional disadvantage which is an implication of the second one = mentioned, but is, IMHO, worthy of its own bullet point: o In cases of parallel point to point links, it is impossible to = determine which of the parallel links was taken when attempting to troubleshoot unless one sends packets directly between the two = attached link-locals on the specific interfaces. Since many network problems behave differently for traffic to/from a router = than for traffic through the router(s) in question, this can pose a significant hurdle to some troubleshooting scenarios. Section 2.4 I=92m not sure why this is being discussed separately for eBGP vs. iBGP. = The implications are identical IMHO. Further, I note that iBGP is not discussed at all. Suggest rewriting the = document to change all references to eBGP to be simply BGP and discuss = differences between iBGP and eBGP in additional detail where applicable. o In some implementations, it is not possible to carry IPv4 routes = over an IPv6 session. o Multi-vendor interoperability for multi-family BGP sessions is = not especially well tested and interoperability problems have been encountered in some combinations. Section 2.5 Routes learned via eBGP and being announced over iBGP are not a case of = route redistribution, a term which is generally taken to mean the = transferring of routes from one protocol to another. eBGP and iBGP are = not different protocols and do not maintain separate RIBs. They are, = slightly different behaviors of a single routing protocol depending on = whether the peer-as number matches the local as-number (iBGP) or not = (eBGP). In fact, multi-hop eBGP is nearly indistinguishable in its = behavior from iBGP. =93If one is configuring parallel eBGP sessions for IPv4 and IPv6 = routes, then using link-local addresses for the IPv6 session introduces = an extra difference between the two sessions which could otherwise be = avoided=94 =97 I=92m unclear on what this difference that could be = avoided is. The two sessions will, by virtue of the different address = families have different addresses expressed in different address = formats. Is there some additional difference implied by a LL address of = which I am unaware? Since section 2.5 is specified for eBGP only, I=92m not sure where the = most appropriate place to add this would be, but I believe it is worth = noting: o iBGP using link local addresses is utterly impractical in most = situations because most iBGP sessions are multi hop by virtue of = termination on the loopback interface. o Using LL eBGP would, thus introduce an additional inconsistency = in the management techniques for eBGP which is also a potential source = of confusion and error. Section 2.6 Last bullet=85 In addition: At the time of writing, these extensions are = not widely supported by all vendors. I hope these suggestions are useful in your development of this draft. = Sorry for making my comments so late. This is the first time I have had = time to review the proposal in detail. Owen On Mar 6, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Philip Matthews = wrote: > Folks: >=20 > It has been a while since an update to this document has been = published, and I apologize for that. However, thanks to much help from = Victor (who is now a co-author) and some prodding today by John, a new = revision is now ready. Both Victor and I were very busy in the last few = months and were not able to get a revision out in time for this week's = meeting. >=20 > Originally, the plan was to expand the document with a bunch of = additional topics. Both Victor and I have ideas, but what we lack is = time to work on them. So we are now thinking of keeping the list of = topics covered to what is in this version, and covering new topics = somewhere else. With this plan, the hope is that we can finish this WG = document in a timely manner. >=20 > As always, comments are most welcome. >=20 > - Philip >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 2014-03-06, at 18:44 , internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 >>=20 >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts = directories. >> This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. >>=20 >> Title : Design Choices for IPv6 Networks >> Authors : Philip Matthews >> Victor Kuarsingh >> Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt >> Pages : 13 >> Date : 2014-03-06 >>=20 >> Abstract: >> This document presents advice on the design choices that arise when >> designing IPv6 networks (both dual-stack and IPv6-only). The >> intended audience is someone designing an IPv6 network who is >> knowledgeable about best current practices around IPv4 network >> design, and wishes to learn the corresponding practices for IPv6. >>=20 >>=20 >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices/ >>=20 >> There's also a htmlized version available at: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 >>=20 >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01 >>=20 >>=20 >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of = submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >>=20 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Mon Mar 10 19:55:37 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012271A0395; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:55:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KURznw1ikStw; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71C321A03A7; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:55:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.1.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140311025524.32511.89968.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 19:55:24 -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/mZBQdDGeZ7z_Ve0ojgn-UDJq2eI Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:55:29 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : NAT64 Deployment Options and Experience Authors : Gang Chen Zhen Cao Chongfeng Xie David Binet Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10.txt Pages : 22 Date : 2014-03-10 Abstract: This document summarizes NAT64 function deployment scenarios and operational experience. Both NAT64 Carrier Grade NAT (NAT64-CGN) and NAT64 server Front End (NAT64-FE) are considered in this document. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Mon Mar 10 20:37:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 262A01A03AB for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:37:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.148 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.148 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_24=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zu7lyQxTf7MV for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:37:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC82D1A06E8 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 20:37:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BEL02009; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:37:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:36:37 +0000 Received: from NKGEML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.32) by lhreml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.218) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:37:20 +0000 Received: from NKGEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.224]) by nkgeml401-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.32]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 11:37:16 +0800 From: "Liubing (Leo)" To: "Brzozowski, John" , Alexandru Petrescu , Mark ZZZ Smith , Lorenzo Colitti , "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations Thread-Index: AQHPOUb/XoquZc4Fz0uKa7Wj2i6L2ZrUTqSAgABm6ACAAL5egIAFwXWg Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:37:16 +0000 Message-ID: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D877DA9@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.132] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/85nBqErPzf3qISexFRmRGxu9cZM Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:37:39 -0000 SGkgSm9obiAmIExvcmVuem8sDQoNClNvcnJ5IGZvciB0aGUgbGF0ZSByZXBseS4NCg0KVGhlIGNh c2UgaXMgYW4gYXNzdW1wdGlvbiB0aGF0IGhhbmRsaW5nIG11bHRpcGxlIHByZWZpeGVzIGlzc3Vl cyBzdWNoIGFzIGFkZHJlc3Mgc2VsZWN0aW9uIG1pZ2h0IGJlIHRvbyBjb21wbGV4IGZvciBhICJj b25zdHJhaW5lZCBub2RlIi4gSXQgaXMgaW50ZW5kZWQgdG8gYmUgYSBoaW50IHRoYXQgTlBUdjYg bWlnaHQgYmUgbmVlZGVkIGluIHNvbWUgc2l0dWF0aW9uLiBIb3dldmVyLCBjb25zdHJhaW5lZCBu b2RlIG1heWJlIGZhaWxlZCB0byBiZSBhIGdvb2QgZXhhbXBsZSBvZiBpdC4NCkJ1dCBpdCBpcyBu b3QgaW50ZW5kZWQgdG8gYmUgYW55IGtpbmQgb2YgUmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb24uIElmIGFzc3VtcHRp b24gaXMgcHJvYmxlbWF0aWMgdG8gZGVzY3JpYmUgcG90ZW50aWFsIHVzZSBjYXNlcywgd2UnbGwg Y29uc2lkZXIgdG8gZGVsZXRlIHRoZSByZWxldmFudCB0ZXh0cy4NCg0KQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0K QmluZw0KDQoNCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJvbTogdjZvcHMgW21h aWx0bzp2Nm9wcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgQnJ6b3pvd3NraSwNCj4g Sm9obg0KPiBTZW50OiBTYXR1cmRheSwgTWFyY2ggMDgsIDIwMTQgMjo1MiBBTQ0KPiBUbzogQWxl eGFuZHJ1IFBldHJlc2N1OyBNYXJrIFpaWiBTbWl0aDsgTG9yZW56byBDb2xpdHRpOyB2Nm9wc0Bp ZXRmLm9yZyBXRw0KPiBTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBOUFQ2NiBjb21tZW50IG9uDQo+IGRy YWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucw0KPiANCj4gVGhlIGZvbGxv d2luZyBxdWVzdGlvbiBmcm9tIExvcmVuem8gc2VlbXMgdmFsaWQuICBJbiB0aGUgdGhyZWFkIHRo dXMgZmFyIEkNCj4gaGF2ZSBub3Qgc2VlbiBhIHJlcGx5LiAgQ2FuIHRoZSBhdXRob3JzIHBsZWFz ZSBjb21tZW50IG9uIHRoZSBiZWxvdz8NCj4gDQo+ICJJdCdzIG5vdCBjbGVhciB3aGF0IGNvbnN0 cmFpbnRzIGFyZSByZWZlcnJlZCB0byBoZXJlLiBJZiB0aGUgc2Vuc29yIG5vZGVzDQo+IGFscmVh ZHkgc3VwcG9ydCBTTEFBQywgdGhlbiB3aHkgY2FuJ3QgdGhleSBzdXBwb3J0IFVMQStHVUEgYXMN Cj4gZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBpbiBzZWN0aW9uIDMuMi4yPyINCj4gDQo+IEpvaG4NCj4gDQo+ID09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQo+IEpvaG4gSmFzb24gQnJ6b3pv d3NraQ0KPiBDb21jYXN0IENhYmxlDQo+IG0pIDYwOS0zNzctNjU5NA0KPiBvKSA0ODQtOTYyLTAw NjANCj4gdykgd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldA0KPiBlKSBqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29t Y2FzdC5jb20NCj4gPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCj4g DQo+IA0KPiANCj4gDQo+IA0KPiANCj4gLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCj4gRnJv bTogQWxleGFuZHJ1IFBldHJlc2N1IDxhbGV4YW5kcnUucGV0cmVzY3VAZ21haWwuY29tPg0KPiBE YXRlOiBGcmlkYXksIE1hcmNoIDcsIDIwMTQgNzozMCBBTQ0KPiBUbzogTWFyayBaWlogU21pdGgg PG1hcmt6enpzbWl0aEB5YWhvby5jb20uYXU+LCBMb3JlbnpvIENvbGl0dGkNCj4gPGxvcmVuem9A Z29vZ2xlLmNvbT4sIHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NCj4gU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9w c10gTlBUNjYgY29tbWVudCBvbg0KPiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1l bmRhdGlvbnMNCj4gDQo+ID5MZSAwNy8wMy8yMDE0IDAyOjIyLCBNYXJrIFpaWiBTbWl0aCBhIMOp Y3JpdCA6DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+PiBfX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fXyBGcm9tOiBMb3JlbnpvIENvbGl0dGkNCj4gPj4+IDxsb3Jlbnpv QGdvb2dsZS5jb20+IFRvOiAidjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgV0ciIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NCj4g U2VudDoNCj4gPj4+IEZyaWRheSwgNyBNYXJjaCAyMDE0IDE6MTYgQU0gU3ViamVjdDogW3Y2b3Bz XSBOUFQ2NiBjb21tZW50IG9uDQo+ID4+PiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1yZWNv bW1lbmRhdGlvbnMNCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+Pg0KPiA+Pj4NCj4gPj4+IFNlY3Rpb24gMy4yLjEgc2F5 czsNCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PiBJbiBzb21lIHZlcnkgY29uc3RyYWluZWQgc2l0dWF0aW9ucyhmb3Ig ZXhhbXBsZSwgaW4gdGhlIHNlbnNvcnMpLA0KPiA+Pj4gdGhlICAgbmV0d29yayBuZWVkcyBVTEEg YXMgdGhlIG9uLWRlbWFuZCBhbmQgc3RhYmxlIGFkZHJlc3NpbmcNCj4gPj4+IHdoaWNoICAgZG9l c24ndCBuZWVkIG11Y2ggY29kZSB0byBzdXBwb3J0IGFkZHJlc3MgYXNzaWdubWVudA0KPiA+Pj4g bWVjaGFuaXNtcyBsaWtlICAgREhDUCBvciBmdWxsIE5EIChOb3RlOiBzdXJlbHkgaXQgbmVlZHMg U0xBQUMpLiBJZg0KPiA+Pj4gdGhlIG5ldHdvcmsgYWxzbyAgIG5lZWRzIHRvIGNvbm5lY3QgdG8g dGhlIG91dHNpZGUsIHRoZW4gdGhlcmUgY2FuDQo+ID4+PiBiZSBhbiBOUFR2NiBnYXRld2F5ICAg d2hpY2ggaXMgbm90IHN1YmplY3QgdG8gZXh0cmVtZSByZXNvdXJjZQ0KPiA+Pj4gY29uc3RyYWlu dHMuIEVzcGVjaWFsbHkgd2hlbiAgIGEgbGlnaHR3ZWlnaHQgaXNvbGF0ZWQgbmV0d29yayBuZWVk cw0KPiA+Pj4gdG8gYWRkIEludGVybmV0IGNvbm5lY3Rpdml0eSwgICB0aGlzIGlzIHF1aXRlIGEg c3RyYWlnaHRmb3J3YXJkIGFuZA0KPiA+Pj4gZWZmaWNpZW50IHdheS4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+Pg0K PiA+Pj4gSXQncyBub3QgY2xlYXIgd2hhdCBjb25zdHJhaW50cyBhcmUgcmVmZXJyZWQgdG8gaGVy ZS4gSWYgdGhlIHNlbnNvcg0KPiA+Pj4gbm9kZXMgYWxyZWFkeSBzdXBwb3J0IFNMQUFDLCB0aGVu IHdoeSBjYW4ndCB0aGV5IHN1cHBvcnQgVUxBK0dVQSBhcw0KPiA+Pj4gZG9jdW1lbnRlZCBpbiBz ZWN0aW9uIDMuMi4yPw0KPiA+Pj4NCj4gPj4+DQo+ID4+PiBJcyB0aGlzIHNvbWV0aGluZyB3ZSB3 YW50IHRvIHJlY29tbWVuZD8NCj4gPj4NCj4gPj4gSSBkb24ndCB0aGluayBpdCBpcy4gSWYgYSBu b2RlIGlzIHNvIHJlc291cmNlIGNvbnN0cmFpbmVkIHRoYXQgaXQNCj4gPj4gY2FuJ3Qgc3VwcG9y dCAzIElQdjYgcHJlZml4ZXMgaW5zdGVhZCBvZiB0d28gKGkuZS4sIExMICsgVUxBIHZzIExMICsN Cj4gPj4gVUxBICsgR1VBKSwgdGhlbiBJJ2Qgd29uZGVyIGlmIGl0IGhhcyBlbm91Z2ggcmVzb3Vy Y2VzIHRvIHRvIHJ1biBldmVuDQo+ID4+IGEgYmFzaWMgYXBwbGljYXRpb24gdXNlZnVsbHkuDQo+ ID4+DQo+ID4+IElmIGl0IGNhbid0IHN1cHBvcnQgMyBJUHY2IHByZWZpeGVzLCBwZXJoYXBzIHRo ZSBub2RlIHNob3VsZG4ndCBiZSBhDQo+ID4+IGdlbmVyYWwgcHVycG9zZSBjb21wdXRlciB0aGF0 IHN1cHBvcnRzIHJ1bm5pbmcgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIGxvY2FsbHkNCj4gPj4gYXQgYWxsLCBidXQg c2hvdWxkIGluc3RlYWQgYmUgYW4gaW5wdXQgb3Igb3V0cHV0IGRldmljZSBvZiBzb21lIGZvcm0N Cj4gPj4gdGhhdCBpcyBhdHRhY2hlZCB2aWEgc29tZXRoaW5nIG11Y2ggc2ltcGxlciB0aGFuIElQ djYgdG8gYSBjb21wdXRlcg0KPiA+PiB0aGF0IGRvZXMgcnVuIHRoZSBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgYW5k IGRvZXMgcnVuIElQdjYgd2VsbCBlbm91Z2guDQo+ID4NCj4gPkluIHRoaXMgZGlyZWN0aW9uLCBh IHBvc3NpYmlsaXR5IG1heSBiZSB0byBtYWtlIElQdjYgYWRhcHQgdG8gdGhlDQo+ID5zaW1wbGVz dCBhcHBsaWNhdGlvbnMgb24gc3VjaCBub2RlczogbWF5YmUgb25seSB1c2Ugb25lIGFkZHJlc3MN Cj4gPihwcmVzdW1hYmx5IFVMQSBvciBHVUEsIGJ1dCBub3QgTEwpLCBtYXliZSBsb3dlciB0aGUg UkZDMjQ2MCBtaW5pbWFsDQo+ID5NVFUgdG8gNDFieXRlcyAoZnVsbCBiYXNlIGhlYWRlciBhbmQg MSBieXRlIG9mIGFwcCksIG1heWJlIHJ1biBvbmx5IG9uZQ0KPiA+YXV0b2NvbmZpZyBwcm90b2Nv bCAobm90IGJvdGggUkErREhDUCBhbmQgdGhhdCBsaW5rIGxheWVyJ3MNCj4gPmF1dG9jb25maWcp LCBhbmQgc28gb24uDQo+ID4NCj4gPkkgdGhpbmsgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBVTEFzIGlzIG5vdCBwcmV2 ZW50aW5nIGFueSBvZiB0aGVzZSwgYW5kIGlzIG5vdA0KPiA+bmVjZXNzYXJpbHkgaW52aXRpbmcg dGhlIHVzZSBvZiBOUFQgLSBpdCBjb3VsZCB3b3JrIHdpdGggaXQsIG9yIG5vdC4NCj4gPg0KPiA+ QnV0LCBpZiBhc2tlZCB3aGV0aGVyIHByZWZlcnJpbmcgYSBVTEEgYWRkcmVzcyBvbiB0aGUgc2Vu c29yLCBvciBqdXN0DQo+ID50aGF0IGxpbmsgbGF5ZXIncyBhZGRyZXNzLCBJJ2QgcHJlZmVyIHRo ZSBmb3JtZXIsIGJlY2F1c2UgaXQgaGFzIGxhcmdlcg0KPiA+c2NvcGUsIGNvdWxkIGJlIHJlYWNo ZWQgZnJvbSBtb3JlIHBsYWNlcy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+QWxleA0KPiA+DQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IFJlZ2Fy ZHMsIE1hcmsuDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fIHY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcNCj4gbGlzdA0KPiA+PiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZyBo dHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Y2b3BzDQo+ID4+DQo+ID4+DQo+ ID4NCj4gPg0KPiA+X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X18NCj4gPnY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiA+djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4gPmh0dHBzOi8v d3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vdjZvcHMNCj4gDQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IHY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0K PiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L3Y2b3BzDQo= From nobody Mon Mar 10 21:43:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4EB11A03C8 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.925 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A8tANTyLAv7h for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ie0-x22f.google.com (mail-ie0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B054C1A0361 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id to1so8272209ieb.20 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=a6jr3qa7wmTq0hmFTNahXcWkIXAlOiVsjUhZgjuNHeA=; b=bKTHNgl3id1LCUySF3lh5UWh+RhzLjigfwV97gW3j71FM7AK8Vq6dIbW5XIlOKqQf3 Edn0oy+fibgZwVgsDE3SwbCfE4bvhbmOOox9F0T6UQW6kXR3h7UllKDJGJVUwhyeo+y8 CaUI9dYYl5oC371798KhkZEIE9h2Zs9et/kzF/4Hcu1//WhuKp3AlcB1eyqi6lmAe1L4 S2OeaFcy5KCU9qEO1+tytGBIJIGlPVwVhup5ozFn453PKncPj1tMTG0AnozAaOzmio8X GIidFeIN+1CnMkvRAekeQNQSZ4ixgdotGNkTrIjd8MAG3kII899O/Sw2PlhKvU8kavla i9Nw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=a6jr3qa7wmTq0hmFTNahXcWkIXAlOiVsjUhZgjuNHeA=; b=IJt2mv6D3e5L2g7zPqcqu4PNlsU+e+RzfK2x2xR8Sm6Ei14MeyuLMQNK8k+t2P6HQq EIyUcAkzpV8sr/O2uOBdJ0FDK2FGGUiRgAqbvxM84CqNq6c1/JRkav3dvmcpLLUcc/pd N5KaihcK1zjRN8yqF10fA5TdTZFaekx9QeQRZg9saVkl0NblcRy6NBgc4D9OdHOwi3Tf A3ILEx0wwhJZT8fHuZ3b4m3zrnlh0gmKOr2N0ZjLcRxD4YdvTQ16p7W9zQH9KEUk4jas N7WCm0Cb7yXAA0kj2TM5tx7BBOFVd7i4SHQdM3cqsIZEknRIDj5pPQpBJbFcgBw1PJU7 jwIw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm7yR2iyvoYNPaoSc+6mQkuSM8lPOBFXJZD1/432MyOyoK5oQdl9hS34ddoh4ztOYTeo028m3iQZaCvPP2oADNiMPbLQtwtHDYDjR+o1Y9etp2aCGLWEoeoF70xCJiGGHmYNRciLjYQG5MSqqybxMIRNZ1cCVYpGamlydOR8vThV9momGo2TGLlRiWZcPreAkghEjOZ X-Received: by 10.50.143.12 with SMTP id sa12mr21710209igb.45.1394513001953; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.18.136 with HTTP; Mon, 10 Mar 2014 21:43:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D877DA9@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D877DA9@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> From: Lorenzo Colitti Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:43:01 +0900 Message-ID: To: "Liubing (Leo)" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134cd021ddebd04f44d5c0d Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/NWzjiOUMTHzTR_viHBHuxXphBig Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 04:43:29 -0000 --001a1134cd021ddebd04f44d5c0d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Liubing (Leo) wrote: > The case is an assumption that handling multiple prefixes issues such as > address selection might be too complex for a "constrained node". It is > intended to be a hint that NPTv6 might be needed in some situation. > However, constrained node maybe failed to be a good example of it. > 1. If it's not a good example, then we should delete it. 2. If it's the only example, then we should avoid listing ULA-only deployment using NPTv6 as a scenario. The NPTv6 RFC says "the IETF does not recommend the use of Network Address Translation technology for IPv6", so we should not list this as a scenario unless there is a use case for it. --001a1134cd021ddebd04f44d5c0d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= ue, Mar 11, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Liubing (Leo) <leo.liubing@huawei.com= > wrote:
The case is an assumption that handling multiple prefixes = issues such as address selection might be too complex for a "constrain= ed node". It is intended to be a hint that NPTv6 might be needed in so= me situation. However, constrained node maybe failed to be a good example o= f it.

1. If it's not a good example, then we= should delete it.
2. If it's the only example, then we shoul= d avoid listing ULA-only deployment using NPTv6 as a scenario. The NPTv6 RF= C says "the IETF does not recommend the use of Network Address Transla= tion technology for IPv6", so we should not list this as a scenario un= less there is a use case for it.
--001a1134cd021ddebd04f44d5c0d-- From nobody Tue Mar 11 01:13:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62D0B1A0381 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:13:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.797 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.797 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iZzc0qu5tGOQ for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:13:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tcmail93.telekom.de (tcmail93.telekom.de [80.149.113.205]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 211021A0369 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from he113415.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.125.65.81]) by tcmail91.telekom.de with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 11 Mar 2014 09:13:18 +0100 Received: from HE100024.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.125.65.200) by HE113415.emea1.cds.t-internal.com (10.125.65.81) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.342.0; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:17 +0100 Received: from HE113605.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([10.125.65.122]) by HE100024.emea1.cds.t-internal.com ([::1]) with mapi; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:16 +0100 From: To: Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:15 +0100 Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment Thread-Index: Ac89AcBfaWkXdEfoQYaGgnwyTNy/rA== Message-ID: Accept-Language: de-DE Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: de-DE Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/h8gN36EvhY4Yyn_nddH19HDwLqc Cc: v6ops@wjcerveny.com Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:13:29 -0000 V2UsIERldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20sIGFyZSBkZXBsb3lpbmcgKGZyb20gdGhlIHN0YXJ0IG9mIG91 ciBJUHY2IFJvbGwtT3V0IDEsNSB5ZWFycyBhZ28pIGhvbWUgZ2F0ZXdheXMgdG8gb3VyIGN1c3Rv bWVycywgdGhhdCBhbm5vdW5jZSBhbHNvIFVMQXMgb24gdGhlIEhvbWUgTEFOIHNpZGUuIFVwIHRv IGtub3cgSSd2ZSBub3QgaGVhcmQgb2YgYW55IHRyb3VibGVzIGNyZWF0ZWQgYnkgdXNpbmcgVUxB cyBhbmQgR1VBcyBpbiBwYXJhbGxlbCwgYnV0IEknbGwgZG91YmxlLWNoZWNrIHdpdGggb3VyIG9w ZXJhdGlvbmFsIHVuaXRzIG9uY2UgbW9yZS4gVGhlIGRlcGxveWVkIGN1c3RvbWVyIGJhc2UgdG9k YXkgaXMgYWJvdXQgMS41IE1pbyBEdWFsLVN0YWNrIGN1c3RvbWVycy4NCkFGQUkgcmVtZW1iZXIg dGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIHJlYXNvbiBmb3IgZGVwbG95aW5nIGFsc28gVUxBcyB3YXMgdG8gbWFrZSBz dXJlIHRoYXQgSVB2NiBjb25uZWN0aXZpdHkgY2FuIGVhc2lseSBiZSB1c2VkIGJldHdlZW4gSG9t ZSBMQU4gc3lzdGVtcyBhbHNvIGluIHRoZSBjYXNlIHdoZW4gdGhlIHVwbGluayBpcyBub3QgY29u bmVjdGVkIGFuZCB0aGVyZSBpcyBubyBHVUEgYXZhaWxhYmxlLiBMTEFzIGhhZCBiZWVuIGNvbnNp ZGVyZWQgYXMgaW5zdWZmaWNpZW50IGJlY2F1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIG5lZWQgdG8gYWRkIHRoZSBpbnRl cmZhY2UgaWRlbnRpZmllciB0byB0aGUgYWRkcmVzcyB3aGVuIHRyeWluZyB0byBlc3RhYmxpc2gg YSAobGluaykgbG9jYWwgSVB2NiBjb25uZWN0aW9uLg0KDQpKdXN0IG15IDIgY2VudC4NCk9sYWYN Cg0KLS0tLS1VcnNwcsO8bmdsaWNoZSBOYWNocmljaHQtLS0tLQ0KVm9uOiB2Nm9wcyBbbWFpbHRv OnY2b3BzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIEltIEF1ZnRyYWcgdm9uIFdpbGxpYW0gQ2VydmVueQ0K R2VzZW5kZXQ6IE1vbnRhZywgMTAuIE3DpHJ6IDIwMTQgMjA6NTANCkFuOiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9y Zw0KQmV0cmVmZjogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gSS1EIEFjdGlvbjogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi12Nm9wcy11bGEt dXNhZ2UtcmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zLTAyLnR4dA0KDQpQb3N0aW5nIG9udG8gdGhlIGxpc3Qgd2l0 aCB3aGF0IEkgc2FpZCBhdCB0aGUgdjZvcHMgbWVldGluZyBvbiBUaHVyc2RheToNCg0KSeKAmXZl IGJlZW4gdXNpbmcgYSBVTEEgaW4gYSB0ZXN0IGxhYiBmb3IgcGVyaGFwcyA2IHllYXJzLiAgVGhl eSB3b3JrIGZpbmUgYW5kIHNlcnZlIG91ciByZXF1aXJlbWVudCBmb3IgaGF2aW5nIGEgYmxvY2sg b2YgYWRkcmVzc2VzIHRoYXQgY2FuIGJlIHJvdXRlZCB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIHRlc3QgbGFiIGF0IGEg c2luZ2xlIGxvY2F0aW9uLiAgSXQgaXMgcG9zc2libGUgdGhhdCBhdCBzb21lIHBvaW50IHdlIHdp bGwgd2FudCB0byByb3V0ZSB3aXRoIGEgZGlmZmVyZW50IHRlc3QgbGFiLCBmb3Igd2hpY2ggd2Ug d291bGRu4oCZdCB3YW50IHRoaXMgdHJhZmZpYyB0byBsZWF2ZSBlaXRoZXIgdGVzdCBsYWIuIFdl IGFyZW7igJl0IHJvdXRpbmcgdGhlIHRyYWZmaWMgb3V0c2lkZSBvZiB0aGUgdGVzdCBsYWIgYW5k IGZvciBvdXIgYXBwbGljYXRpb24gaXQgaXMgdW5kZXNpcmFibGUgZm9yIG91ciB0ZXN0IHRyYWZm aWMgbGVmdCB0aGUgdGVzdCBsYWIuDQoNCkkgY2FuIHRoaW5rIG9mIHR3byBzaXR1YXRpb25zIHdo ZXJlIFVMQXMgd291bGQgYmUgbW9yZSB2YWx1YWJsZSBpbiDigJxpc29sYXRlZOKAnSBuZXR3b3Jr cyB0aGFuIEdVQXMgd291bGQgYmU6DQoxKSBXZSBkb27igJl0IGV2ZXIgd2FudCB0aGUgdHJhZmZp YyBhZGRyZXNzZWQgd2l0aCBVTEFzIHRvIGxlYXZlIHRoZSB0ZXN0IG5ldHdvcmsuIElmIHdlIGFk ZHJlc3NlZCB3aXRoIGEgR1VBLCBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBlYXNpZXIgZm9yIHRoZSB0cmFmZmljIHRv IGJlIGFjY2lkZW50YWxseSByb3V0ZWQgb3V0c2lkZSB0aGUgdGVzdCBsYWIgKEkgdGhpbmsgRnJl ZCBzcGVsbGVkIG91dCB0aGlzIHNjZW5hcmlvKS4NCjIpIFRoZXJlIG1heSBiZSBhZG1pbmlzdHJh dGl2ZWx5IGNvbXBsZXggb3IgcHJvaGliaXRpdmUgY2hhbGxlbmdlcyBpbiBhY3F1aXJpbmcgR1VB cyBmb3Igc3BlY2lmaWMgcHJvamVjdHMuIElmIG9uZSB3ZXJlIHRvIG5lZWQgYWRkcmVzc2VzIChv dGhlciB0aGFuIGxpbmstbG9jYWwgYWRkcmVzc2VzKSBmb3IgYSBzbWFsbCBpc29sYXRlZCBuZXR3 b3JrIGFuIGFzc2lnbmVkIEdVQSBpcyB1bmF2YWlsYWJsZSwgaXQgY291bGQgYmUgZGVzaXJhYmxl IHRvIHVzZSBhIFVMQSBpbnN0ZWFkIG9mIHJhbmRvbSBhZGRyZXNzIHNwYWNlLg0KDQpCaWxsIENl cnZlbnkNCg0KT24gRnJpLCBGZWIgMTQsIDIwMTQsIGF0IDA1OjEzIEFNLCBpbnRlcm5ldC1kcmFm dHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgd3JvdGU6DQo+IA0KPiBBIE5ldyBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdCBpcyBhdmFpbGFi bGUgZnJvbSB0aGUgb24tbGluZSBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMgDQo+IGRpcmVjdG9yaWVzLg0KPiAg VGhpcyBkcmFmdCBpcyBhIHdvcmsgaXRlbSBvZiB0aGUgSVB2NiBPcGVyYXRpb25zIFdvcmtpbmcg R3JvdXAgb2YgdGhlICANCj4gSUVURi4NCj4gDQo+ICAgICAgICAgVGl0bGUgICAgICAgICAgIDog UmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zIG9mIFVzaW5nIFVuaXF1ZSBMb2NhbCBBZGRyZXNzZXMNCj4gICAgICAg ICBBdXRob3JzICAgICAgICAgOiBCaW5nIExpdQ0KPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IFNoZW5nIEppYW5nDQo+IAlGaWxlbmFtZSAgICAgICAgOiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11 c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbnMtMDIudHh0DQo+IAlQYWdlcyAgICAgICAgICAgOiAxNQ0KPiAJ RGF0ZSAgICAgICAgICAgIDogMjAxNC0wMi0xNA0KPiANCj4gQWJzdHJhY3Q6DQo+ICAgIFRoaXMg ZG9jdW1lbnQgcHJvdmlkZXMgZ3VpZGFuY2Ugb2YgaG93IHRvIHVzZSBVTEFzLiBJdCBhbmFseXpl cyBVTEENCj4gICAgdXNhZ2Ugc2NlbmFyaW9zIGFuZCByZWNvbW1lbmRzIHVzZSBjYXNlcyB3aGVy ZSBVTEEgYWRkcmVzc2VzIG1pZ2h0IGJlDQo+ICAgIGJlbmVmaWNpYWxseSB1c2VkLg0KPiANCj4g DQo+IFRoZSBJRVRGIGRhdGF0cmFja2VyIHN0YXR1cyBwYWdlIGZvciB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IGlzOg0K PiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3JnL2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11 c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1lbmRhDQo+IHRpb25zLw0KPiANCj4gVGhlcmUncyBhbHNvIGEgaHRtbGl6ZWQg dmVyc2lvbiBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQ6DQo+IGh0dHA6Ly90b29scy5pZXRmLm9yZy9odG1sL2RyYWZ0 LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucy0NCj4gMDINCj4gDQo+IEEgZGlm ZiBmcm9tIHRoZSBwcmV2aW91cyB2ZXJzaW9uIGlzIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdDoNCj4gaHR0cDovL3d3 dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9yZmNkaWZmP3VybDI9ZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi12Nm9wcy11bGEtdXNhZ2UtcmVjb21t ZW5kYQ0KPiB0aW9ucy0wMg0KPiANCj4gDQo+IFBsZWFzZSBub3RlIHRoYXQgaXQgbWF5IHRha2Ug YSBjb3VwbGUgb2YgbWludXRlcyBmcm9tIHRoZSB0aW1lIG9mIA0KPiBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHVudGls IHRoZSBodG1saXplZCB2ZXJzaW9uIGFuZCBkaWZmIGFyZSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQgDQo+IHRvb2xz LmlldGYub3JnLg0KPiANCj4gSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGFyZSBhbHNvIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBieSBh bm9ueW1vdXMgRlRQIGF0Og0KPiBmdHA6Ly9mdHAuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzLw0K PiANCj4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4g djZvcHMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+IHY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnDQo+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYu b3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vdjZvcHMNCg0KX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCnY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KdjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcN Cmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vdjZvcHMNCg== From nobody Tue Mar 11 01:26:16 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25E5D1A03DB for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1gpVSeK8c53r for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x231.google.com (mail-we0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB5971A03E0 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f177.google.com with SMTP id u57so9506262wes.22 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=WaSmiY4c6FWEOfDc/JaW6/OSJggCLSDdSZKDHzH3Tew=; b=YUeLzIw1O8Os6Q8QmKNE2oHb5OO8/1o3bYr3MPZ8tgLWTUnlPbmtC/3hYj1/D3De3n rxscqEalw75sr2/uptyX0r50MRMgJaACLzSB4ZhjMxGItz4/vd1woAeJ8TdTrI2UXKDJ sKnicO4B0iqCQZ0dtiiWAmVCUI6Tf+hyhxuxnJiiB7W27e1D8IsyYDzkXUzWRWmUN8GW iZIfADfleBWezkPu24EG1HJxJicwd4zuuov+eiqqR3aQuzxtu1ZE+p7d2YE77+yxOnDV uNJqlrx5uZ3GwFmVRD1r0cI26ocvhcqSYxT3X6V3wQs5u4tim0GQoHAB1JzyOjPA9gGj /WyA== X-Received: by 10.180.87.162 with SMTP id az2mr1924339wib.23.1394526362700; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (cpc8-mort6-2-0-cust102.croy.cable.virginm.net. [82.43.108.103]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z1sm59515767wjq.19.2014.03.11.01.26.01 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Mar 2014 01:26:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <531EC895.8080205@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 21:25:57 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Owen DeLong References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> <8B8D3417-4331-448E-B518-059BF003E3A3@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <8B8D3417-4331-448E-B518-059BF003E3A3@delong.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/tZ9fJ9_4SoQA6LYYuNQbInIW6HM Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:26:13 -0000 On 11/03/2014 08:06, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> This makes no sense=E2=80=A6 Too many things depend on LL and elimina= ting it >>> would be a pretty fundamental redesign of the protocol >>> functionality. >> Whereas I agree with the necessity of LL in other contexts where it is= >> currently overlooked, I think much of the LL need is from ND, MLD an >> DHCP. I think none of them is mandatory by specification (i.e. no spe= c >> requires a node to implement e.g. ND). >=20 > I don't think that ND is optional, but I could be wrong. How would you = expect > a node that is not on a point-to-point link to function without ND? It's a SHOULD in fact: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6434#section-5.2 That means you need a very good technical reason not to implement it. A pt2pt link might be such a reason. =2E.. >>> I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as a recommended or >>> straight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. ULA without NPT >>> for local connectivity is tolerable. >> Yes, but not the 'ill' part. Maybe just advised in some context not o= thers. >=20 > No, it is utterly and completely ill-advised in any context. Agreed. There are sometimes claims that it is a security solution, but a firewall is the lesser evil in that case. =2E.. On 11/03/2014 10:01, Owen DeLong wrote: =2E.. > My point is that we should avoid recommending ULA+NPT for hosts that ar= e communicating to the outside world because NPT and all other forms of N= AT should be considered harmful. IMHO that is consistent with the NPTv6 experimental RFC document (2nd para at http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6296#section-1). Clearly the ULA document should say the same. Brian From nobody Tue Mar 11 02:14:07 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63901A03E8 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:14:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oPJmLhao4sJB for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72371A0381 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 02:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BBY41585; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:12:26 +0000 Received: from NKGEML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.33) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:09 +0000 Received: from NKGEML506-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.224]) by nkgeml402-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.33]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 17:13:03 +0800 From: "Liubing (Leo)" To: "Olaf.Bonness@telekom.de" , "v6ops@wjcerveny.com" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment Thread-Index: Ac89AcBfaWkXdEfoQYaGgnwyTNy/rAABRXpQ Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:13:03 +0000 Message-ID: <8AE0F17B87264D4CAC7DE0AA6C406F453D877F48@nkgeml506-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.98.132] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/DeaDzMWKU5KR8ROTJIdm2EVk1GE Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:14:06 -0000 SGkgT2xhZiAmIEJpbGwsDQoNClRoYW5rcyBtdWNoIGZvciBzaGFyaW5nIHRoZSByZWFsIGRlcGxv eW1lbnQgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gd2hpY2ggY291bGQgYmUgYSBnb29kIHByb3ZlIGZvciB0aGUgcmVs ZXZhbnQgdXNlIGNhc2VzIGluIHRoZSBkcmFmdC4NCg0KQmVzdCByZWdhcmRzLA0KQmluZw0KDQo+ IC0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQo+IEZyb206IHY2b3BzIFttYWlsdG86djZvcHMt Ym91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gT24gQmVoYWxmIE9mDQo+IE9sYWYuQm9ubmVzc0B0ZWxla29tLmRl DQo+IFNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNkYXksIE1hcmNoIDExLCAyMDE0IDQ6MTMgUE0NCj4gVG86IHY2b3BzQGll dGYub3JnDQo+IENjOiB2Nm9wc0B3amNlcnZlbnkuY29tDQo+IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNd IEktRCBBY3Rpb246DQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9u cy0wMi50eHQgLSBVTEEgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KPiANCj4gV2UsIERldXRzY2hlIFRlbGVrb20sIGFy ZSBkZXBsb3lpbmcgKGZyb20gdGhlIHN0YXJ0IG9mIG91ciBJUHY2IFJvbGwtT3V0IDEsNQ0KPiB5 ZWFycyBhZ28pIGhvbWUgZ2F0ZXdheXMgdG8gb3VyIGN1c3RvbWVycywgdGhhdCBhbm5vdW5jZSBh bHNvIFVMQXMgb24NCj4gdGhlIEhvbWUgTEFOIHNpZGUuIFVwIHRvIGtub3cgSSd2ZSBub3QgaGVh cmQgb2YgYW55IHRyb3VibGVzIGNyZWF0ZWQgYnkNCj4gdXNpbmcgVUxBcyBhbmQgR1VBcyBpbiBw YXJhbGxlbCwgYnV0IEknbGwgZG91YmxlLWNoZWNrIHdpdGggb3VyIG9wZXJhdGlvbmFsDQo+IHVu aXRzIG9uY2UgbW9yZS4gVGhlIGRlcGxveWVkIGN1c3RvbWVyIGJhc2UgdG9kYXkgaXMgYWJvdXQg MS41IE1pbw0KPiBEdWFsLVN0YWNrIGN1c3RvbWVycy4NCj4gQUZBSSByZW1lbWJlciB0aGUgb3Jp Z2luYWwgcmVhc29uIGZvciBkZXBsb3lpbmcgYWxzbyBVTEFzIHdhcyB0byBtYWtlIHN1cmUNCj4g dGhhdCBJUHY2IGNvbm5lY3Rpdml0eSBjYW4gZWFzaWx5IGJlIHVzZWQgYmV0d2VlbiBIb21lIExB TiBzeXN0ZW1zIGFsc28gaW4NCj4gdGhlIGNhc2Ugd2hlbiB0aGUgdXBsaW5rIGlzIG5vdCBjb25u ZWN0ZWQgYW5kIHRoZXJlIGlzIG5vIEdVQSBhdmFpbGFibGUuDQo+IExMQXMgaGFkIGJlZW4gY29u c2lkZXJlZCBhcyBpbnN1ZmZpY2llbnQgYmVjYXVzZSBvZiB0aGUgbmVlZCB0byBhZGQgdGhlDQo+ IGludGVyZmFjZSBpZGVudGlmaWVyIHRvIHRoZSBhZGRyZXNzIHdoZW4gdHJ5aW5nIHRvIGVzdGFi bGlzaCBhIChsaW5rKSBsb2NhbCBJUHY2DQo+IGNvbm5lY3Rpb24uDQo+IA0KPiBKdXN0IG15IDIg Y2VudC4NCj4gT2xhZg0KPiANCj4gLS0tLS1VcnNwcsO8bmdsaWNoZSBOYWNocmljaHQtLS0tLQ0K PiBWb246IHY2b3BzIFttYWlsdG86djZvcHMtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZ10gSW0gQXVmdHJhZyB2 b24gV2lsbGlhbQ0KPiBDZXJ2ZW55DQo+IEdlc2VuZGV0OiBNb250YWcsIDEwLiBNw6RyeiAyMDE0 IDIwOjUwDQo+IEFuOiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBCZXRyZWZmOiBSZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBJLUQg QWN0aW9uOg0KPiBkcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbnMtMDIu dHh0DQo+IA0KPiBQb3N0aW5nIG9udG8gdGhlIGxpc3Qgd2l0aCB3aGF0IEkgc2FpZCBhdCB0aGUg djZvcHMgbWVldGluZyBvbiBUaHVyc2RheToNCj4gDQo+IEnigJl2ZSBiZWVuIHVzaW5nIGEgVUxB IGluIGEgdGVzdCBsYWIgZm9yIHBlcmhhcHMgNiB5ZWFycy4gIFRoZXkgd29yayBmaW5lIGFuZA0K PiBzZXJ2ZSBvdXIgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgZm9yIGhhdmluZyBhIGJsb2NrIG9mIGFkZHJlc3NlcyB0 aGF0IGNhbiBiZSByb3V0ZWQNCj4gd2l0aGluIHRoZSB0ZXN0IGxhYiBhdCBhIHNpbmdsZSBsb2Nh dGlvbi4gIEl0IGlzIHBvc3NpYmxlIHRoYXQgYXQgc29tZSBwb2ludCB3ZQ0KPiB3aWxsIHdhbnQg dG8gcm91dGUgd2l0aCBhIGRpZmZlcmVudCB0ZXN0IGxhYiwgZm9yIHdoaWNoIHdlIHdvdWxkbuKA mXQgd2FudCB0aGlzDQo+IHRyYWZmaWMgdG8gbGVhdmUgZWl0aGVyIHRlc3QgbGFiLiBXZSBhcmVu 4oCZdCByb3V0aW5nIHRoZSB0cmFmZmljIG91dHNpZGUgb2YgdGhlDQo+IHRlc3QgbGFiIGFuZCBm b3Igb3VyIGFwcGxpY2F0aW9uIGl0IGlzIHVuZGVzaXJhYmxlIGZvciBvdXIgdGVzdCB0cmFmZmlj IGxlZnQgdGhlDQo+IHRlc3QgbGFiLg0KPiANCj4gSSBjYW4gdGhpbmsgb2YgdHdvIHNpdHVhdGlv bnMgd2hlcmUgVUxBcyB3b3VsZCBiZSBtb3JlIHZhbHVhYmxlIGluDQo+IOKAnGlzb2xhdGVk4oCd IG5ldHdvcmtzIHRoYW4gR1VBcyB3b3VsZCBiZToNCj4gMSkgV2UgZG9u4oCZdCBldmVyIHdhbnQg dGhlIHRyYWZmaWMgYWRkcmVzc2VkIHdpdGggVUxBcyB0byBsZWF2ZSB0aGUgdGVzdA0KPiBuZXR3 b3JrLiBJZiB3ZSBhZGRyZXNzZWQgd2l0aCBhIEdVQSwgaXQgd291bGQgYmUgZWFzaWVyIGZvciB0 aGUgdHJhZmZpYyB0byBiZQ0KPiBhY2NpZGVudGFsbHkgcm91dGVkIG91dHNpZGUgdGhlIHRlc3Qg bGFiIChJIHRoaW5rIEZyZWQgc3BlbGxlZCBvdXQgdGhpcw0KPiBzY2VuYXJpbykuDQo+IDIpIFRo ZXJlIG1heSBiZSBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdGl2ZWx5IGNvbXBsZXggb3IgcHJvaGliaXRpdmUgY2hhbGxl bmdlcyBpbg0KPiBhY3F1aXJpbmcgR1VBcyBmb3Igc3BlY2lmaWMgcHJvamVjdHMuIElmIG9uZSB3 ZXJlIHRvIG5lZWQgYWRkcmVzc2VzIChvdGhlcg0KPiB0aGFuIGxpbmstbG9jYWwgYWRkcmVzc2Vz KSBmb3IgYSBzbWFsbCBpc29sYXRlZCBuZXR3b3JrIGFuIGFzc2lnbmVkIEdVQSBpcw0KPiB1bmF2 YWlsYWJsZSwgaXQgY291bGQgYmUgZGVzaXJhYmxlIHRvIHVzZSBhIFVMQSBpbnN0ZWFkIG9mIHJh bmRvbSBhZGRyZXNzDQo+IHNwYWNlLg0KPiANCj4gQmlsbCBDZXJ2ZW55DQo+IA0KPiBPbiBGcmks IEZlYiAxNCwgMjAxNCwgYXQgMDU6MTMgQU0sIGludGVybmV0LWRyYWZ0c0BpZXRmLm9yZyB3cm90 ZToNCj4gPg0KPiA+IEEgTmV3IEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0IGlzIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBmcm9tIHRoZSBv bi1saW5lIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cw0KPiA+IGRpcmVjdG9yaWVzLg0KPiA+ICBUaGlzIGRyYWZ0 IGlzIGEgd29yayBpdGVtIG9mIHRoZSBJUHY2IE9wZXJhdGlvbnMgV29ya2luZyBHcm91cCBvZiB0 aGUNCj4gPiBJRVRGLg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gICAgICAgICBUaXRsZSAgICAgICAgICAgOiBSZWNvbW1l bmRhdGlvbnMgb2YgVXNpbmcgVW5pcXVlIExvY2FsDQo+IEFkZHJlc3Nlcw0KPiA+ICAgICAgICAg QXV0aG9ycyAgICAgICAgIDogQmluZyBMaXUNCj4gPiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IFNoZW5nIEppYW5nDQo+ID4gCUZpbGVuYW1lICAgICAgICA6DQo+IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMt dWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucy0wMi50eHQNCj4gPiAJUGFnZXMgICAgICAgICAgIDog MTUNCj4gPiAJRGF0ZSAgICAgICAgICAgIDogMjAxNC0wMi0xNA0KPiA+DQo+ID4gQWJzdHJhY3Q6 DQo+ID4gICAgVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBwcm92aWRlcyBndWlkYW5jZSBvZiBob3cgdG8gdXNlIFVM QXMuIEl0IGFuYWx5emVzIFVMQQ0KPiA+ICAgIHVzYWdlIHNjZW5hcmlvcyBhbmQgcmVjb21tZW5k cyB1c2UgY2FzZXMgd2hlcmUgVUxBIGFkZHJlc3Nlcw0KPiBtaWdodCBiZQ0KPiA+ICAgIGJlbmVm aWNpYWxseSB1c2VkLg0KPiA+DQo+ID4NCj4gPiBUaGUgSUVURiBkYXRhdHJhY2tlciBzdGF0dXMg cGFnZSBmb3IgdGhpcyBkcmFmdCBpczoNCj4gPiBodHRwczovL2RhdGF0cmFja2VyLmlldGYub3Jn L2RvYy9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1lbmRhDQo+ID4gdGlvbnMvDQo+ ID4NCj4gPiBUaGVyZSdzIGFsc28gYSBodG1saXplZCB2ZXJzaW9uIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdDoNCj4g PiBodHRwOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1y ZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbnMtDQo+ID4gMDINCj4gPg0KPiA+IEEgZGlmZiBmcm9tIHRoZSBwcmV2aW91 cyB2ZXJzaW9uIGlzIGF2YWlsYWJsZSBhdDoNCj4gPiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3JnL3JmY2Rp ZmY/dXJsMj1kcmFmdC1pZXRmLXY2b3BzLXVsYS11c2FnZS1yZWNvbW1lbmRhDQo+ID4gdGlvbnMt MDINCj4gPg0KPiA+DQo+ID4gUGxlYXNlIG5vdGUgdGhhdCBpdCBtYXkgdGFrZSBhIGNvdXBsZSBv ZiBtaW51dGVzIGZyb20gdGhlIHRpbWUgb2YNCj4gPiBzdWJtaXNzaW9uIHVudGlsIHRoZSBodG1s aXplZCB2ZXJzaW9uIGFuZCBkaWZmIGFyZSBhdmFpbGFibGUgYXQNCj4gPiB0b29scy5pZXRmLm9y Zy4NCj4gPg0KPiA+IEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhcmUgYWxzbyBhdmFpbGFibGUgYnkgYW5vbnlt b3VzIEZUUCBhdDoNCj4gPiBmdHA6Ly9mdHAuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaW50ZXJuZXQtZHJhZnRzLw0KPiA+ DQo+ID4gX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4g PiB2Nm9wcyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QNCj4gPiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiA+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3 LmlldGYub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vdjZvcHMNCj4gDQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+IHY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiB2 Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Y2 b3BzDQo+IF9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+ IHY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPiB2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZw0KPiBodHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRm Lm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Y2b3BzDQo= From nobody Tue Mar 11 03:30:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40AB41A066D; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:30:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Uo50Oa88dIUp; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:30:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C66581A068D; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:30:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.1.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140311103007.25227.99851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:30:07 -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Vh7rZG01dBc2e3j3G5CxwBaPncU Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 10:30:10 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices Authors : David Binet Mohamed Boucadair Ales Vizdal Cameron Byrne Gang Chen Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2014-03-11 Abstract: This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE 802.11 network). This document defines a different profile than the one for general connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area Network) connectivity are in scope. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/ There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Tue Mar 11 07:53:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CFE81A0736 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.748 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.748 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zylMX-bvkZqY for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.32.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32751A0735 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s2BErnEs024443; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:49 -0700 Received: from XCH-PHX-212.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-212.sw.nos.boeing.com [130.247.25.141]) by blv-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s2BErjbf024374 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:45 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-108.nw.nos.boeing.com (2002:82f7:1989::82f7:1989) by XCH-PHX-212.sw.nos.boeing.com (2002:82f7:198d::82f7:198d) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.174.1; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:44 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.102]) by XCH-BLV-108.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.13.8]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 07:53:44 -0700 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: "v6ops@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHPPRTqHou2/ID140qgfd70SPcG9prb+K4w Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:53:43 +0000 Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBEC2@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> References: <20140311103007.25227.99851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140311103007.25227.99851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/NVz0GBMCvXFIWHoBXIguoPUxOQM Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:53:57 -0000 Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. Has there been some kind of determination/consideration regarding MobileIP and the like? Thanks - Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com > -----Original Message----- > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@= ietf.org > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.tx= t >=20 >=20 > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts direct= ories. > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IE= TF. >=20 > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile f= or 3GPP Mobile Devices > Authors : David Binet > Mohamed Boucadair > Ales Vizdal > Cameron Byrne > Gang Chen > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > Pages : 17 > Date : 2014-03-11 >=20 > Abstract: > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE > 802.11 network). >=20 > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. >=20 > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > Network) connectivity are in scope. >=20 >=20 > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/ >=20 > There's also a htmlized version available at: > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 >=20 > A diff from the previous version is available at: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile= -07 >=20 >=20 > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submiss= ion > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Tue Mar 11 08:00:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE60F1A048D for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id S0jHPi2pCqzY for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x22e.google.com (mail-we0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A657D1A0479 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f174.google.com with SMTP id t60so10018366wes.5 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=srn3NVc2emJAgb8sp0LGj6kjTyF19TzF2EectOABS5s=; b=XEt2d3sa5gJ3erwPZMITLzTPKDc4PDTYWnLdrJxyn2iALa547J5lVN7k6VWfOMGezp K9TV7Jdzb3b5F2bHDL0AwcVIAHbLMC1IBwFrKY0CMdop5Qr70+MehFCK6dKh1mt1DikD qcNOuRRfJ04ZD34z1r1XgCKbIZkMqwuvLiAlbi02brm4uDR0XZTvimI88M59yYy4pxDo pnDlxhsQHTMd68xybW5uQU+ba0c7lkr6U7jFV/8Yh3fjWCkFudHp5vIyaJD2LO4xIjod 34z4uj+elxiEBegcH8GAadDxB1zPehKyK+sYHAzSdd8P5F8rs58CC3kpCPdvtSu8daeG x1JA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.219.44 with SMTP id pl12mr3471987wic.12.1394550043475; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.106.130 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.106.130 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBEC2@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> References: <20140311103007.25227.99851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBEC2@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:00:43 -0700 Message-ID: From: Cb B To: "Templin, Fred L" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134d908f6844604f455fb6e Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/zp_Sn4_oTd1A3eg16upJdzSl3AA Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:00:52 -0000 --001a1134d908f6844604f455fb6e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" wrote: > > Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. > Has there been some kind of determination/consideration > regarding MobileIP and the like? > The scope of the doc is 3gpp. Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. CB > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF. > > > > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices > > Authors : David Binet > > Mohamed Boucadair > > Ales Vizdal > > Cameron Byrne > > Gang Chen > > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > Pages : 17 > > Date : 2014-03-11 > > > > Abstract: > > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE > > 802.11 network). > > > > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > > > > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > > Network) connectivity are in scope. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/ > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > v6ops mailing list > > v6ops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --001a1134d908f6844604f455fb6e Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile.
> Has there been some kind of determination/consideration
> regarding MobileIP and the like?
>

The scope of the doc is 3gpp.

Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip.

CB

> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com=
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: v6ops [mailto:v6o= ps-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM
> > To: i-d-announce@ietf.or= g
> > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Draft= s directories.
> > =A0This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group= of the IETF.
> >
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Title =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : An Internet Protocol = Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Authors =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : David Binet
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Mohamed Bouca= dair
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Ales Vizdal > > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Cameron Byrne=
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Gang Chen
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 Filename =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-dev= ice-profile-07.txt
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 Pages =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 : 17
> > =A0 =A0 =A0 Date =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0: 2014-03-11
> >
> > Abstract:
> > =A0 =A0This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of ope= rators
> > =A0 =A0recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IP= v6-only or
> > =A0 =A0dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular netwo= rk and IEEE
> > =A0 =A0802.11 network).
> >
> > =A0 =A0This document defines a different profile than the one for= general
> > =A0 =A0connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066].= =A0In
> > =A0 =A0particular, this document identifies also features to deli= ver IPv4
> > =A0 =A0connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport.
> >
> > =A0 =A0Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN = (Wide Area
> > =A0 =A0Network) connectivity are in scope.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobil= e-device-profile/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-p= rofile-07
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops= -mobile-device-profile-07
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of= submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.or= g/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--001a1134d908f6844604f455fb6e-- From nobody Tue Mar 11 08:12:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0CAA1A0746 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.747 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.747 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3NK6aEu1RrTU for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com [130.76.64.129]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04DDE1A0479 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/DOWNSTREAM_MBSOUT) with SMTP id s2BFCHKx024746; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:17 -0700 Received: from XCH-PHX-410.sw.nos.boeing.com (xch-phx-410.sw.nos.boeing.com [10.57.37.41]) by slb-mbsout-02.boeing.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/UPSTREAM_MBSOUT) with ESMTP id s2BFC9MC024663 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK); Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:10 -0700 Received: from XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.4.102]) by XCH-PHX-410.sw.nos.boeing.com ([169.254.10.219]) with mapi id 14.03.0174.001; Tue, 11 Mar 2014 08:12:09 -0700 From: "Templin, Fred L" To: Cb B Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHPPTqsHou2/ID140qgfd70SPcG9prb/OIw Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:12:08 +0000 Message-ID: <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBF20@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> References: <20140311103007.25227.99851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBEC2@XCH-BLV-504.nw.nos.boeing.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [130.247.104.6] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBF20XCHBLV504nwnosboe_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-TM-AS-MML: disable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7Skh_7OS9vv86fBLHjJxPdIF12I Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:12:26 -0000 --_000_2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBF20XCHBLV504nwnosboe_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Not sure I got that, but if there is a consideration for MobileIP then migh= t also want to look at AERO, which basically treats the phone as a mobile router f= or IPv6 w/o using MobileIP: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-templin-aerolink/ AERO also has built-in route optimization, and works equally well over eith= er IPv4 or IPv6 as the carrier network. Thanks - Fred fred.l.templin@boeing.com From: Cb B [mailto:cb.list6@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:01 AM To: Templin, Fred L Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" > wrote: > > Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. > Has there been some kind of determination/consideration > regarding MobileIP and the like? > The scope of the doc is 3gpp. Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. CB > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts dire= ctories. > > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. > > > > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile= for 3GPP Mobile Devices > > Authors : David Binet > > Mohamed Boucadair > > Ales Vizdal > > Cameron Byrne > > Gang Chen > > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > Pages : 17 > > Date : 2014-03-11 > > > > Abstract: > > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEE= E > > 802.11 network). > > > > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > > > > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > > Network) connectivity are in scope. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile= / > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > v6ops mailing list > > v6ops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --_000_2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBF20XCHBLV504nwnosboe_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Not sure I got that, but = if there is a consideration for MobileIP then might also<= /p>

want to look at AERO, whi= ch basically treats the phone as a mobile router for

IPv6 w/o using MobileIP:<= o:p>

 <= /p>

https://datatracker.ietf.org/do= c/draft-templin-aerolink/

 <= /p>

AERO also has built-in ro= ute optimization, and works equally well over either

IPv4 or IPv6 as the carri= er network.

 <= /p>

Thanks – Fred<= /o:p>

fred.l.templin@boeing.com=

 <= /p>

From: Cb B [ma= ilto:cb.list6@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:01 AM
To: Templin, Fred L
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-prof= ile-07.txt

 


On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile.
> Has there been some kind of determination/consideration
> regarding MobileIP and the like?
>

The scope of the doc is 3gpp.

Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip.

CB

> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com=
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: v6ops [mailto:v6o= ps-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM
> > To: i-d-announce@ietf.or= g
> > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Draft= s directories.
> >  This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Gr= oup of the IETF.
> >
> >         Title         &nb= sp; : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices=
> >         Authors         := David Binet
> >                   &n= bsp;       Mohamed Boucadair
> >                   &n= bsp;       Ales Vizdal
> >                   &n= bsp;       Cameron Byrne
> >                   &n= bsp;       Gang Chen
> >       Filename        : draft-= ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt
> >       Pages           : 1= 7
> >       Date           &nbs= p;: 2014-03-11
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number = of operators
> >    recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to= an IPv6-only or
> >    dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular= network and IEEE
> >    802.11 network).
> >
> >    This document defines a different profile than the o= ne for general
> >    connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC= 7066].  In
> >    particular, this document identifies also features t= o deliver IPv4
> >    connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > >
> >    Both hosts and devices with capability to share thei= r WAN (Wide Area
> >    Network) connectivity are in scope.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-0= 7
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of= submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.or= g/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--_000_2134F8430051B64F815C691A62D983181EBF20XCHBLV504nwnosboe_-- From nobody Thu Mar 13 09:29:56 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7268B1A09F0 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:29:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.047 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.047 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id toisUl2zDrCt for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-2.cisco.com (alln-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.142.89]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F1D1A0A48 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 09:29:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=11635; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1394728179; x=1395937779; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=HpN+Lxr4k1nyCN5wZ8cXHeBdrYz/1vxCzl8th78aKaE=; b=ktLCoIohG8GSoJKy5numb4bBKy5z/7lRckfNCCK3+MM484IF7ytkoYtn mZpim+2rWPVvpA6t8Skv2+LCCal2xFYnG03+DSO93qe1dDaaTDu4Uld4k D0riU7dUH6SH90Kw0XM4apzX2UvCeMyqcx18WPwkoLjIswwe9ybH2Gzyn I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AqwFAF/cIVOtJV2Y/2dsb2JhbABZgkJEO1EGuHiBPYcugRcWdIIlAQEBAwEBAQFrCwUHBgEIEQMBAQEBJygGCxQJCAIEDgUJh1wDCQgIBcxHDYZ5F4xGKYFDGg0EBwYDhC8ElFmBf4FtgTKLM4VIgy2CKw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.97,648,1389744000"; d="scan'208,217"; a="27235964" Received: from rcdn-core-1.cisco.com ([173.37.93.152]) by alln-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 13 Mar 2014 16:29:38 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by rcdn-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2DGTcGa007373 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:29:39 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.143]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Thu, 13 Mar 2014 11:29:38 -0500 From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" To: Cb B , "Templin, Fred L" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHPPtlslifWw753mUaL45LvoKN9gw== Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:29:37 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616 x-originating-ip: [10.32.246.213] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF4729881209E6sgundaveciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/VfOhbvD8ZsBAbMsEkG5UnMx75XE Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2014 16:29:53 -0000 --_000_CF4729881209E6sgundaveciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. I've not reviewed this doc. But, to the specific point below .. 3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching to 3GPP access using DSMIP (RFC62= 75/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that interface. One may argue there is not much traction for client-based mobility, but tha= ts a different issue. Sri From: Cb B > Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:00 AM To: "Templin, Fred L" > Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" > wrote: > > Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. > Has there been some kind of determination/consideration > regarding MobileIP and the like? > The scope of the doc is 3gpp. Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. CB > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts dire= ctories. > > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. > > > > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile= for 3GPP Mobile Devices > > Authors : David Binet > > Mohamed Boucadair > > Ales Vizdal > > Cameron Byrne > > Gang Chen > > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > Pages : 17 > > Date : 2014-03-11 > > > > Abstract: > > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEE= E > > 802.11 network). > > > > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > > > > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > > Network) connectivity are in scope. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile= / > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > v6ops mailing list > > v6ops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --_000_CF4729881209E6sgundaveciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip.

I've not reviewed this doc. But, to the specific point below ..

3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching to 3GPP access using DSMIP (= RFC6275/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that interface.

One may argue there is not much traction for client-based mobility, bu= t thats a different issue.

Sri


From: Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:00 = AM
To: "Templin, Fred L" <= ;Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com= >
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6o= ps@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: dr= aft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt


On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile.
> Has there been some kind of determination/consideration
> regarding MobileIP and the like?
>

The scope of the doc is 3gpp.

Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip.

CB

> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com=
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: v6ops [mailto:v6o= ps-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM
> > To: i-d-announce@ietf.or= g
> > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Draft= s directories.
> >  This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Gr= oup of the IETF.
> >
> >         Title         &nb= sp; : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices=
> >         Authors         := David Binet
> >                   &n= bsp;       Mohamed Boucadair
> >                   &n= bsp;       Ales Vizdal
> >                   &n= bsp;       Cameron Byrne
> >                   &n= bsp;       Gang Chen
> >       Filename        : draft-= ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt
> >       Pages           : 1= 7
> >       Date           &nbs= p;: 2014-03-11
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number = of operators
> >    recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to= an IPv6-only or
> >    dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular= network and IEEE
> >    802.11 network).
> >
> >    This document defines a different profile than the o= ne for general
> >    connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC= 7066].  In
> >    particular, this document identifies also features t= o deliver IPv4
> >    connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > >
> >    Both hosts and devices with capability to share thei= r WAN (Wide Area
> >    Network) connectivity are in scope.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-0= 7
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of= submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.or= g/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

 --_000_CF4729881209E6sgundaveciscocom_-- From nobody Fri Mar 14 02:29:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B1101A00DD for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 02:29:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.548 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.548 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FCNez1Mg7Btz for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 02:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relais-inet.francetelecom.com (relais-ias244.francetelecom.com [80.12.204.244]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4117C1A00DB for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 02:29:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from omfeda06.si.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.199]) by omfeda13.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 9CC37190908; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:29:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from PUEXCH71.nanterre.francetelecom.fr (unknown [10.101.44.33]) by omfeda06.si.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 7C470C804F; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:29:18 +0100 (CET) Received: from PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.11]) by PUEXCH71.nanterre.francetelecom.fr ([10.101.44.33]) with mapi; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:29:18 +0100 From: To: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" , Cb B , "Templin, Fred L" Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 10:29:13 +0100 Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHPPtlslifWw753mUaL45LvoKN9g5rgTdXA Message-ID: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11D@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: fr-FR Content-Language: fr-FR X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: fr-FR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11DPUEXCB1Bnante_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-PMX-Version: 6.0.3.2322014, Antispam-Engine: 2.7.2.2107409, Antispam-Data: 2014.3.12.60315 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/wG9C0nqd9pQ8DbqkZ8yFhhJ5QVk Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:29:29 -0000 --_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11DPUEXCB1Bnante_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Sri, Client-based IP mobility is optional in 3GPP. The support of rfc5555 is not= required for the mobile deployments we are of. FWIW, RFC5555 was listed as a MAY in an old version of the document, but it= was removed to be aligned with the spirit of the document: focus on core f= eatures to provide IPv6 connectivity and those to avoid IPv4 continuity ove= r IPv6 service disruption. Cheers, Med De : v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Sri Gundavelli (sg= undave) Envoy=E9 : jeudi 13 mars 2014 17:30 =C0 : Cb B; Templin, Fred L Cc : v6ops@ietf.org Objet : Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.t= xt > Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. I've not reviewed this doc. But, to the specific point below .. 3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching to 3GPP access using DSMIP (RFC62= 75/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that interface. One may argue there is not much traction for client-based mobility, but tha= ts a different issue. Sri From: Cb B > Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:00 AM To: "Templin, Fred L" > Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" > wrote: > > Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. > Has there been some kind of determination/consideration > regarding MobileIP and the like? > The scope of the doc is 3gpp. Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. CB > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts dire= ctories. > > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. > > > > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile= for 3GPP Mobile Devices > > Authors : David Binet > > Mohamed Boucadair > > Ales Vizdal > > Cameron Byrne > > Gang Chen > > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > Pages : 17 > > Date : 2014-03-11 > > > > Abstract: > > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEE= E > > 802.11 network). > > > > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > > > > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > > Network) connectivity are in scope. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile= / > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > v6ops mailing list > > v6ops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11DPUEXCB1Bnante_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Sri,=

 

 

FWIW, RFC5555= was listed as a MAY in an old version of the document, but it was removed = to be aligned with the spirit of the document: focus on core features to pr= ovide IPv6 connectivity and those to avoid IPv4 continuity over IPv6 servic= e disruption.

 

Cheers,

M= ed

 

De : v6ops [= mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Sri Gundavelli (sgundav= e)
Envoy=E9 : jeudi 13 mars 2014 17:30
=C0 : = Cb B; Templin, Fred L
Cc : v6ops@ietf.org
Objet := Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt<= o:p>

 

=

 

> Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use = mobile ip.

&= nbsp;

I've not reviewe= d this doc. But, to the specific point below ..

=

 

3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching to 3GPP acce= ss using DSMIP (RFC6275/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that interface.<= o:p>

 =

One may argue there is not = much traction for client-based mobility, but thats a different issue.<= /o:p>

 

Sri

<= div>

 

 

From: Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 20= 14 8:00 AM
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Cc: = "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [= v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt=

 


On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L= " <Fred.L.Templin@boei= ng.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being= listed in the profile.
> Has there been some kind of determination/c= onsideration
> regarding MobileIP and the like?
>

The scope of the doc is 3gpp.

Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. <= /p>

CB

> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com
&g= t;
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: v6ops [mailto= :v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On B= ehalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.o= rg
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM
> > To: = i-d-announce@ietf.org
> = > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> > = Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt<= br>> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available fr= om the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> >  This draft i= s a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.
> >= ;
> >         Title        = ;   : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile De= vices
> >         Authors      =   : David Binet
> >            = ;               Mohamed Boucadair
>= ; >                    = ;       Ales Vizdal
> >        =                   Cameron Byr= ne
> >                 &nb= sp;         Gang Chen
> >      = Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07.txt
> >       Pages       &nbs= p;   : 17
> >       Date       =      : 2014-03-11
> >
> > Abstract:
>= ; >    This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of = operators
> >    recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobi= le devices to an IPv6-only or
> >    dual-stack wireless= network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEEE
> >   &nbs= p;802.11 network).
> >
> >    This document def= ines a different profile than the one for general
> >    = ;connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066].  In
>= ; >    particular, this document identifies also features to d= eliver IPv4
> >    connectivity service over an IPv6-onl= y transport.
> >
> >    Both hosts and devices = with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area
> >    Net= work) connectivity are in scope.
> >
> >
> > The= IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > htt= ps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
&= gt; > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-pr= ofile-07
> >
> > A diff from the previous version is = available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2= =3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07
> >
> ><= br>> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time= of submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are availab= le at tools.ietf.org.
> >> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> = > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/int= ernet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________= ________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6o= ps
>
> _______________________________________________
&= gt; v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf= .org
> ht= tps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

= --_000_94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11DPUEXCB1Bnante_-- From nobody Fri Mar 14 09:45:28 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9001A00F1 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:45:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -15.047 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.047 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E6OA7ob7NWyW for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:45:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.86.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49A8E1A0164 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 09:45:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=22876; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1394815516; x=1396025116; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=Kt9Cn7ASZYQwloA7UgDKqXj+IsSQ/EaztjGCuwZAJqg=; b=cCaiQIGGJWXbA3F6FuyDcZ8sJuGX9U7FUatNs0y2eu30susUqCoEY/lr INI+1E48GGiwElUwG7lGmsQ8Xoxn+W2kGh7pWZGRK8K4X5KYcML6tnvrq Hg/6eMEll2FLeq7X6wej/h92QfaGVXtBb8YQWm/gVTHsPDcje8lBinb4X 4=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwGAKIxI1OtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABZgkJEO1EGuQWBPYcwgRgWdIIlAQEBAwEBAQEqQQsFBwYBCBEDAQEBASAHKAYLFAkIAgQBDQUJh1wDCQgIBcxWDYcfF4xPgW0HEw0EBgEGA4QvBIkZi0CBf4FtgTKLNIVIgy2CKw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,655,1389744000"; d="scan'208,217";a="310466562" Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Mar 2014 16:45:15 +0000 Received: from xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com [173.36.12.78]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2EGjEL4002086 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:45:14 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.6.143]) by xhc-aln-x04.cisco.com ([173.36.12.78]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:45:14 -0500 From: "Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)" To: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" , Cb B , "Templin, Fred L" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt Thread-Index: AQHPP6TFldicVmHaskSP49zEomd01w== Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:45:13 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <94C682931C08B048B7A8645303FDC9F36F51A2D11D@PUEXCB1B.nanterre.francetelecom.fr> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616 x-originating-ip: [10.32.246.213] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF487C9212142Fsgundaveciscocom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/dgMF9kssymz5XZ6Og41gqfVIKic Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:45:25 -0000 --_000_CF487C9212142Fsgundaveciscocom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Mohamed, Client-based S2b/S2c interfaces are the means to access packet core service= s and are indeed optional interfaces. The abstract of this document clearly indicates that the IPv6 profile is fo= r allowing a UE to attach to either a 3GPP or WLAN access network. Now, if = its a untrusted WLAN access, the possible means to access the packet core s= ervices is using either S2b or s2c interfaces. So, in this context, do you = view those interfaces as optional or mandatory ? Looking at Req 12, Req 15, are these mandatory per 3GPP specs ? AFAIK, none= of the IPv6 transitioning approaches are mandatory in 3GPP specs. May be I did not follow the approach here. If you can clarify the approach= that the document follows when including/excluding a profile for a specifi= c protocol, then it will help me. Regards Sri From: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <= mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 2:29 AM To: Sri Gundavelli >, Cb B >, "Templin, Fred L" > Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" > Subject: RE: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt Hi Sri, Client-based IP mobility is optional in 3GPP. The support of rfc5555 is not= required for the mobile deployments we are of. FWIW, RFC5555 was listed as a MAY in an old version of the document, but it= was removed to be aligned with the spirit of the document: focus on core f= eatures to provide IPv6 connectivity and those to avoid IPv4 continuity ove= r IPv6 service disruption. Cheers, Med De : v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Sri Gundavelli (sg= undave) Envoy=E9 : jeudi 13 mars 2014 17:30 =C0 : Cb B; Templin, Fred L Cc : v6ops@ietf.org Objet : Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.t= xt > Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. I've not reviewed this doc. But, to the specific point below .. 3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching to 3GPP access using DSMIP (RFC62= 75/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that interface. One may argue there is not much traction for client-based mobility, but tha= ts a different issue. Sri From: Cb B > Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:00 AM To: "Templin, Fred L" > Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" > Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" > wrote: > > Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile. > Has there been some kind of determination/consideration > regarding MobileIP and the like? > The scope of the doc is 3gpp. Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip. CB > Thanks - Fred > fred.l.templin@boeing.com > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM > > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org > > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.= txt > > > > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts dire= ctories. > > This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the = IETF. > > > > Title : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile= for 3GPP Mobile Devices > > Authors : David Binet > > Mohamed Boucadair > > Ales Vizdal > > Cameron Byrne > > Gang Chen > > Filename : draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt > > Pages : 17 > > Date : 2014-03-11 > > > > Abstract: > > This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number of operators > > recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to an IPv6-only or > > dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular network and IEE= E > > 802.11 network). > > > > This document defines a different profile than the one for general > > connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC7066]. In > > particular, this document identifies also features to deliver IPv4 > > connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > > > > Both hosts and devices with capability to share their WAN (Wide Area > > Network) connectivity are in scope. > > > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile= / > > > > There's also a htmlized version available at: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > > > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07 > > > > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submi= ssion > > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > v6ops mailing list > > v6ops@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --_000_CF487C9212142Fsgundaveciscocom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Mohamed,

Client-based S2b/S2c interfaces are the means to access packet core se= rvices and are indeed optional interfaces. 

The abstract of this document clearly indicates that the IPv6 profile = is for allowing a UE to attach to either a 3GPP or WLAN access network. Now= , if its a untrusted WLAN access, the possible means to access the packet c= ore services is using either S2b or s2c interfaces. So, in this context, do you view those interfaces as op= tional or mandatory ?

Looking at Req 12, Req 15, are these mandatory per 3GPP specs ? AFAIK,= none of the IPv6 transitioning approaches are mandatory in 3GPP specs.&nbs= p;

May be I did not follow the approach here.  If you can clarify th= e approach that the document follows when including/excluding a profile for= a specific protocol, then it will help me.



Regards
Sri

From: "mohamed.boucadair@orange.com" <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com&g= t;
Date: Friday, March 14, 2014 2:29 A= M
To: Sri Gundavelli <sgundave@cisco.com>, Cb B <cb.list6@gmail.com>, "Templin, Fred L= " <Fred.L.Templin@boei= ng.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" <v6o= ps@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [v6ops] I-D Action: dr= aft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt

Hi Sri,

 

Client-based IP mobility is optional in = 3GPP. The support of rfc5555 is not required for the mobile deployments we = are of.

 

FWIW, RFC5555 was listed as a MAY in an = old version of the document, but it was removed to be aligned with the spir= it of the document: focus on core features to provide IPv6 connectivity and those to avoid IPv4 continuity over IPv6 = service disruption.

 

Cheers,

Med

 

De : v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Sri Gundavelli (sgundave)
Envoy=E9 : jeudi 13 mars 2014 17:30
=C0 : Cb B; Templin, Fred L
Cc : v6ops@ietf.org
Objet : Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-= profile-07.txt

 

 

> Mobile ip, generally speaking, do= es not use mobile ip.

 

I've not reviewed this doc. But, to the spe= cific point below ..

 

3GPP S2c is about a mobile node attaching t= o 3GPP access using DSMIP (RFC6275/RFC5555). So, the specs do support that = interface.

 

One may argue there is not much traction fo= r client-based mobility, but thats a different issue.

 

Sri

 

 

From: Cb B <cb.list6@g= mail.com>
Date: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 8:00 AM
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org"= <v6ops@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-prof= ile-07.txt

 


On Mar 11, 2014 7:54 AM, "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I didn't notice MobileIP as being listed in the profile.
> Has there been some kind of determination/consideration
> regarding MobileIP and the like?
>

The scope of the doc is 3gpp.

Mobile ip, generally speaking, does not use mobile ip.

CB

> Thanks - Fred
> fred.l.templin@boeing.com=
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: v6ops [mailto:v6o= ps-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of internet-drafts@ietf.org > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 3:30 AM
> > To: i-d-announce@ietf.or= g
> > Cc: v6ops@ietf.org
> > Subject: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profi= le-07.txt
> >
> >
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Draft= s directories.
> >  This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Gr= oup of the IETF.
> >
> >         Title         &nb= sp; : An Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Profile for 3GPP Mobile Devices=
> >         Authors         := David Binet
> >                   &n= bsp;       Mohamed Boucadair
> >                   &n= bsp;       Ales Vizdal
> >                   &n= bsp;       Cameron Byrne
> >                   &n= bsp;       Gang Chen
> >       Filename        : draft-= ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07.txt
> >       Pages           : 1= 7
> >       Date           &nbs= p;: 2014-03-11
> >
> > Abstract:
> >    This document defines an IPv6 profile that a number = of operators
> >    recommend in order to connect 3GPP mobile devices to= an IPv6-only or
> >    dual-stack wireless network (including 3GPP cellular= network and IEEE
> >    802.11 network).
> >
> >    This document defines a different profile than the o= ne for general
> >    connection to IPv6 cellular networks defined in [RFC= 7066].  In
> >    particular, this document identifies also features t= o deliver IPv4
> >    connectivity service over an IPv6-only transport. > >
> >    Both hosts and devices with capability to share thei= r WAN (Wide Area
> >    Network) connectivity are in scope.
> >
> >
> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile/
> >
> > There's also a htmlized version available at:
> > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-07 > >
> > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-mobile-device-profile-0= 7
> >
> >
> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of= submission
> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> >
> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > ftp://ftp.ietf.or= g/internet-drafts/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > v6ops@ietf.org
> > https://w= ww.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
>
> _______________________________________________
> v6ops mailing list
> v6ops@ietf.org
> https://www.ie= tf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

 --_000_CF487C9212142Fsgundaveciscocom_-- From nobody Fri Mar 14 19:15:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8602E1A022C for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:15:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7h7COnLPcpop for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm24-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm24-vm0.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [98.139.213.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F3401A0236 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [98.139.215.143] by nm24.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:15:05 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.217] by tm14.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:15:05 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1026.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:15:05 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 32707.25362.bm@omp1026.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 78626 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Mar 2014 02:15:04 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com.au; s=s1024; t=1394849704; bh=vADlKniccD4BgpYp+eT5lGdrUpvpOBdgb4c8J36iZuU=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Nitp1W9gscWCjq0njKbOP51ioiMfvxXxjhazfwFEN8QKYZv8pq4sbAiBa+4PCQpTUKLhmMe2jzLdJGHWWrgwU/W/Zbe9wBXkwMpGpKpClbVmob0/1j9lQU1saXWWdVuWQGMn5N4oOQ34Dlfgd783YByt/Q6ayyyJJ/Ob2XYVfRg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=iwthjWNWexgI5RC3uDB5dxz/OtGBSkcITnNyAK5QQ3JKdBbgOEJUj1Bu5nP/beX8MFmd3NMKkExBIdWcyvJLyhSoZlAMsagddJtfHWupKQGrHFoa9HxKpSmLl83OlQF3rtx8BHIIilvLLqwfgtNyZn26HGbhMkpxH7jtdwKJ6os=; X-YMail-OSG: jW8_tGoVM1kcqGZmzHm3yXsjtKSz1buPBKruMPXke9RerIQ mI2ztsTepqp0OagI0wCsN3gtCslte_t4yzzlzPzp63T9B7xuWnOz5hNWiN1s 93.IEIjeNcgAawWv3BttwAtNB9xV9vWhCaR_1r0Ti3INHs5r.F1uqkwjqQI1 OZsBZQV33S9PT5wcoSKnWin4oT9XVsl5KZtwL6lKZk3jVT6p4fde5WpZtF04 wqSXBJgEGY3.qHSl_MixfATmnFwqV79m4T_SIIGFipDSr.5WDvmh0HaQJsdc LOlTBoRS_PnfujDV.XdtguLlIilJWrYVSDg1zTLyFoHYcosa1Xt49xCvrY7j wzMPixcYmWPSqgtUOgCxUv1JGvdSMAzAnCpGEnH_0kQEm6HfPo55XC2XtF_r 46MLJa6r8dDMkuiNIVkEuen41LBZSHCr4jhe6tMIaNIKuZdJR_KdnHIGIzFt m1bmNl0pt4nOunOWjNB4cFoiMLoFW9aCHwivhGvRt6wAtu4My6q1.7xHl13Q pAUYW4QI9Rbf5FCBvFGYYHBYPIo9OkZf8EhB803nB2XmXq4jeanTcSy1fXRL q6bU2FFlXj0MsxemDSZU1_w-- Received: from [150.101.221.237] by web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:15:04 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgoKCi0tLS0tIE9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0KPiBGcm9tOiBBbGV4YW5kcnUgUGV0cmVzY3UgPGFsZXhhbmRydS5wZXRyZXNjdUBnbWFpbC5jb20.Cj4gVG86IE93ZW4gRGVMb25nIDxvd2VuQGRlbG9uZy5jb20.Cj4gQ2M6IE1hcmsgWlpaIFNtaXRoIDxtYXJrenp6c21pdGhAeWFob28uY29tLmF1PjsgTG9yZW56byBDb2xpdHRpIDxsb3JlbnpvQGdvb2dsZS5jb20.OyAidjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcgV0ciIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4KPiBTZW50OiBUdWVzZGF5LCAxMSBNYXJjaCAyMDE0IDQ6NDYgQU0BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.178.641 References: <1394155327.83009.YahooMailNeo@web162204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <53197592.9060703@gmail.com> <2C05974D-E61B-4AAB-9D4A-167EEBE90C77@delong.com> <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1394849704.43137.YahooMailNeo@web162206.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:15:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark ZZZ Smith To: Alexandru Petrescu , Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <531DFA61.3050205@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/CuXg6Fh33p4hnYVWazNJYhk6joM Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org WG" Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mark ZZZ Smith List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 02:15:14 -0000 =0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A> From: Alexandru Petrescu =0A> To: Owen DeLong =0A> Cc: Mar= k ZZZ Smith ; Lorenzo Colitti ; "v6ops@ietf.org WG" =0A> Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2014 4= :46 AM=0A> Subject: Re: [v6ops] NPT66 comment on draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage= -recommendations=0A> =0A> Le 07/03/2014 10:37, Owen DeLong a =C3=A9crit := =0A>> =0A>> On Mar 6, 2014, at 11:30 PM, Alexandru Petrescu=0A>> wrote:=0A>> =0A>>> Le 07/03/2014 02:22, Mark ZZZ Sm= ith a =C3=A9crit :=0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A>>>> =0A=0A> =0A= > And, given a choice between LL and other scope address, one would prefer = =0A> other scope address because it is inevitably larger.=0A>=C2=A0=0A=0AI'= m a bit confused by this. When it comes to using an address as a source or = destination (both at the IPv6 layer or the application layer), when there i= s a a choice between two or more of a set of LLs, ULAs and GUAs, LLs are go= ing to be potentially more reliable better than ULAs, which are going to be= potentially more reliable than GUAs.=0A=0AThe greater the scope of the add= ress, the more parties and devices involved in providing it, configuring it= and operating it, which I think reduces its potential reliability and avai= lability. As I don't think many applications are robust to addresses expiri= ng or becoming unavailable through some network failure, the addresses to p= refer are the ones that are least likely to be disrupted by external events= and never expire. LLs, as a source or destination, if usable because the s= rc/destination are on the same link, are going to be as reliable as the lin= k itself, as they have infinite lifetimes, are required to be on all IPv6 i= nterfaces, and don't require a router to be present to announce them.=C2=A0= =0A=0A=0ARegards,=0AMark.=0A=0A=0A>> I don=E2=80=99t think we need to rede= sign the protocol for small nodes.=0A> =0A> I fully agree.=C2=A0 I do not t= alk of redesign of new protocol, but eliminate=0A> the parts which are in t= he way.=C2=A0 It's like when running IP over SLIP.=0A> =0A>> The reality i= s that nobody has yet claimed an actual node that can=E2=80=99t=0A>> handl= e a third prefix, there is merely some level of speculation=0A>> that such= a node might exist.=0A> =0A> Right.=0A> =0A> There are very many Bluetooth= nodes out there which are very powerful=0A> and dont have IP on them at al= l.=0A> =0A> But there are many other nodes out there on which nobody puts I= P because=0A> they think IP is too heavy.=0A> =0A> This is again a matter o= f formulation and people should understand it.=0A> =0A> There are differenc= es between saying that a constrained node can accept=0A> a GUA, a ULA, or c= an run with both, and that it is unacceptable to say =0A> that because GUA = works ULA is not needed.=0A> =0A>> It is expected that most constrained no= des will run ND/SLAAC only=0A>> and will not support DHCPv6. (such nodes a= ren=E2=80=99t likely to be routers,=0A>> so they should not be sending RAs= ).=0A> =0A> I beg to differ.=C2=A0 Many if not most of these nodes in senso= r networks are =0A> supposed to be actually routers.=0A> =0A>>> I think th= e use of ULAs is not preventing any of these, and is not=0A>>> =C2=A0 neces= sarily inviting the use of NPT - it could work with it, or=0A>>> not.=0A>>= =0A>> I think documenting a case of ULA+NPT as a recommended or=0A>> str= aight-forward way of doing things is ill-advised. ULA without NPT=0A>> for= local connectivity is tolerable.=0A> =0A> Yes, but not the 'ill' part.=C2= =A0 Maybe just advised in some context not =0A> others.=0A> =0A>> ULA+GUA = for stable local connectivity with transient global=0A>> connectivity is t= olerable.=0A>> Persistent GUA is better for the vast=0A>> majority of app= lications.=0A> =0A> I am not sure this is as clear as you writ eit.=C2=A0 I= just dont see any =0A> mentioning of Mobile IP or route updates, which are= quintessential to =0A> realize what you say.=0A> =0A>> ULA+NPT is simply = a really bad idea in virtually any context.=0A> =0A> Disagree.=C2=A0 It is = a good idea in many contexts at the edge.=0A> =0A> It is a good idea for th= e smartphone-and-single-subnet use-case (like in =0A> tethering, mobile hot= spot).=C2=A0 But it is inadequate for a vehicle where =0A> are several subn= ets and still a single /64 is given to it.=0A> =0A>>> But, if asked whethe= r preferring a ULA address on the sensor, or=0A>>> just that link layer's = address, I'd prefer the former, because =0A> it=0A>>> has larger scope, co= uld be reached from more places.=0A>> =0A>> I don=E2=80=99t think this is = a question of either/or and I think you are=0A>> conflating several issues= that aren=E2=80=99t part of this thread and=0A>> perhaps not really relat= ed to this document into the discussion.=0A> =0A> I agree.=0A> =0A> It is n= ot me who conflates.=0A> =0A> You got here NPT mixed in, and simultaneous o= r alternative uses of ULA/GUA.=0A> =0A> I could add many more if I wanted (= NAT, Mobile IP, DHCP PD, 64share, =0A> route updates) but I restrain for th= e benefit of focusing.=0A> =0A> In all cases, it is unacceptable to not rec= ommend ULA in certain =0A> contexts, mostly at the edge.=0A> =0A> People wh= o think core networks have different perspectives than people =0A> who thin= k networks at the far edge, like the network of sensors you =0A> build on a= table disconnected from anything else at the first time.=C2=A0 Try =0A> to= build one, and picture is clearer.=C2=A0 What prefix to put on these =0A> = sensors?=C2=A0 Ask the admin.=C2=A0 The admin says some prefix=C2=A0 but _o= nly_ if =0A> connected at point X, otherwise dont put that GUA.=C2=A0 Mobil= e IP?=C2=A0 Too =0A> heavy at this time, just I need some address to put th= ere.=C2=A0 This is the =0A> essence of ULA reasoning.=0A> =0A> =0A> Alex=0A= > =0A>> =0A>> Owen=0A>>> =0A>> =0A>> =0A>> =0A> From nobody Fri Mar 14 19:40:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 014851A026B for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:40:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.498 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vXYPPjUVluUU for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm47-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm47-vm1.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.115.124]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4221A0230 for ; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.174] by nm47.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:40:15 -0000 Received: from [98.139.212.221] by tm20.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:40:15 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1030.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 15 Mar 2014 02:40:15 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 552998.95776.bm@omp1030.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 19973 invoked by uid 60001); 15 Mar 2014 02:40:15 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com.au; s=s1024; t=1394851215; bh=ZT1bN3ExZA4r81mJ1w1hP3xkkLcW2gDM1AUlAbrUWRw=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=E4GmHbHzS0BvNTGh+EG9BnTXwvpp/578kj5JD6GGJn0ToDlDrMRpPKwIgDkkhyNo4MoYeXXVPdQFaQw3RV7UU/OWZ/jKW1dL1wqZ6RgyBxJZ02ttf4kKq+RvhfD3NVVlmSg/PKYFEqgHWNTEo75hIz92rND+S0eZ2QF+kiMx/Es= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com.au; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=AyOpPxJBhmiTuJACN+0ogY7KC+xRswSgrneI5oFwC9sSIiDulWj5ag+CmlOg3D1feIbO3swLoOh4pWY7dSLNiQRoMaNs/ydDv2EkGUYdgifVum/ufIxrSUnvJrQV89LTgIbvcYG+X5w9pFa3QFJ7w91Ssl8Ty80nAbA5J/7heNI=; X-YMail-OSG: tjAw1moVM1kRoK4Zg0drMaCY2Im7nvVLOXvaiaK1yjsOhPf BtiowPKRCrnthESSAGXuV_Mggz7oEW2mgM7F7KQKKwYMwswsXlbVtNaMR4at 30_Nu3e_Uc4nygd_pJDmGSgFzev30uNswNufQePElKSEIL74uZHSH2p9yasv 3jjfaqXS6dFQT_T8AeqjBbhksrLkbXJoHc3_a6ro.j_NyfvnUH9t0o8lB2fs HaMDAKKOUFHBjmDCzwpvBYzsdh71yy1XYJl0cdeADDibh1tyM0lcDsTEqa54 aq6oPm.EJitosrAAh8YLJLRRlxsJhIE4Bw2ykSGdf4C7LQodui2DTk9AnU6D cVwToMPqa7rEb9h_cH1U3GeeUHz7eu847sw_fBOr1Mqj925Hzcrij_MX6rdX bd.9J.CT4_pOBnFSx2uijxJTPQ29kYiO3PwUyAty4IxKImpsAzs.lBIm2msa Kk.jRE.pEwIobkSuT1tUu73qQU4nbXZSFr37do6sP_TSYQlcaXH_4m0y8zkd 84eISITp_0xbDWJ9B5eXo3SYlOGodDhiTVZ_gXdXIBrv9WQ8zgubNtgC3aOx A62MMNepBthwfO_Yuh5j7HN4- Received: from [150.101.221.237] by web162202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:40:15 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgoKCi0tLS0tIE9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UgLS0tLS0KPiBGcm9tOiAiT2xhZi5Cb25uZXNzQHRlbGVrb20uZGUiIDxPbGFmLkJvbm5lc3NAdGVsZWtvbS5kZT4KPiBUbzogdjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcKPiBDYzogdjZvcHNAd2pjZXJ2ZW55LmNvbQo.IFNlbnQ6IFR1ZXNkYXksIDExIE1hcmNoIDIwMTQgNzoxMyBQTQo.IFN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEktRCBBY3Rpb246IGRyYWZ0LWlldGYtdjZvcHMtdWxhLXVzYWdlLXJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucy0wMi50eHQgLSBVTEEgZGVwbG95bWVudAo.IAo.IFdlLCABMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.178.641 References: Message-ID: <1394851215.10611.YahooMailNeo@web162202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 19:40:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark ZZZ Smith To: "Olaf.Bonness@telekom.de" , "v6ops@ietf.org" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/yczSyEkoasuhTtrMhYoAkI3J320 Cc: "v6ops@wjcerveny.com" Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Mark ZZZ Smith List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 02:40:25 -0000 =0A=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message -----=0A> From: "Olaf.Bonness@telekom.de= " =0A> To: v6ops@ietf.org=0A> Cc: v6ops@wjcerveny.= com=0A> Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2014 7:13 PM=0A> Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D A= ction: draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt - ULA deployment= =0A> =0A> We, Deutsche Telekom, are deploying (from the start of our IPv6 R= oll-Out 1,5 =0A> years ago) home gateways to our customers, that announce a= lso ULAs on the Home =0A> LAN side. Up to know I've not heard of any troubl= es created by using ULAs =0A> and GUAs in parallel, but I'll double-check w= ith our operational units once =0A> more. The deployed customer base today = is about 1.5 Mio Dual-Stack customers.=0A> AFAI remember the original reaso= n for deploying also ULAs was to make sure that =0A> IPv6 connectivity can = easily be used between Home LAN systems also in the case =0A> when the upli= nk is not connected and there is no GUA available.=0A=0AThat "smells" a bit= like you're using Frizbox CPE. Back in 2010 when I was doing some IPv6 res= idential CPE work, and dealing with these boxes, they really seemed to misu= nderstand that IPv6 supports multiple concurrent addresses such as ULAs + G= UAs. When the GUA went away, e.g., when the WAN link went down,the CPE woul= d try to actively deprecate the GUA and swap it for a ULA. Conversely, when= a GUA came back, they would actively try to deprecate the ULA, swapping it= for the recently learned GUA (!). The other issue was that they didn't rea= d the ULA spec correctly, and were announcing a ULA with zeros in the rando= m ID portion. RFC6204 hadn't been published at that time, hopefully their I= Pv6 implementation is much better in this area now.=0A=0AThat being said, I= 've been running a ULA on my home network in parallel with my GUA that I ge= t from my upstream provider since at least May 5th 2013, and have had no is= sues (Fedora + Android hosts). One thing I was doing for a while was modify= ing the Fedora getaddrinfo() preferences to prefer ULAs (via /etc/gai.conf)= , however I haven't got around to doing that for the last few installs, so = even with the older RFC3484 address selection preferences the ULA prefix ha= sn't caused me any problems.=0A=0A> LLAs had been=C2=A0=0A=0A> considered a= s insufficient because of the need to add the interface identifier =0A> to = the address when trying to establish a (link) local IPv6 connection.=0A>=C2= =A0=0A=0AThis does seem to be an area of misunderstanding in some applicati= ons. If getaddrinfo() is used to query for an IPv6 host name that returns a= set of IPv6 addresses, if a Link-Local address is returned, then the inter= face ifIndex that the Link-Local address is reachable on is supposed to be = returned in the sin6_scope_id field of the returned sockaddr structure for = the Link-Local address.=C2=A0=0A=0AFor example, if the LL was received via = multicast DNS, then the interface where the mDNS answer was received would = be the one that should be placed in sin6_scope_id. If an application then u= ses the LL sockaddr structure to establish a connection, then the sockaddr = structure will now hold all the information necessary to successfully use t= he LL address.=0A=0ARegards,=0AMark.=0A=0A=0A> Just my 2 cent.=0A> Olaf=0A>= =0A> -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Nachricht-----=0A> Von: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-b= ounces@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von William Cerveny=0A> Gesendet: Montag, 10. M= =C3=A4rz 2014 20:50=0A> An: v6ops@ietf.org=0A> Betreff: Re: [v6ops] I-D Act= ion: =0A> draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt=0A> =0A> Postin= g onto the list with what I said at the v6ops meeting on Thursday:=0A> =0A>= I=E2=80=99ve been using a ULA in a test lab for perhaps 6 years.=C2=A0 The= y work fine and =0A> serve our requirement for having a block of addresses = that can be routed within =0A> the test lab at a single location.=C2=A0 It = is possible that at some point we will =0A> want to route with a different = test lab, for which we wouldn=E2=80=99t want this traffic =0A> to leave eit= her test lab. We aren=E2=80=99t routing the traffic outside of the test lab= =0A> and for our application it is undesirable for our test traffic left t= he test =0A> lab.=0A> =0A> I can think of two situations where ULAs would b= e more valuable in =E2=80=9Cisolated=E2=80=9D =0A> networks than GUAs would= be:=0A> 1) We don=E2=80=99t ever want the traffic addressed with ULAs to l= eave the test network. =0A> If we addressed with a GUA, it would be easier = for the traffic to be =0A> accidentally routed outside the test lab (I thin= k Fred spelled out this =0A> scenario).=0A> 2) There may be administrativel= y complex or prohibitive challenges in acquiring =0A> GUAs for specific pro= jects. If one were to need addresses (other than link-local =0A> addresses)= for a small isolated network an assigned GUA is unavailable, it could =0A>= be desirable to use a ULA instead of random address space.=0A> =0A> Bill C= erveny=0A> =0A> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014, at 05:13 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org= wrote:=0A>> =0A>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Inte= rnet-Drafts =0A>> directories.=0A>> =C2=A0 This draft is a work item of th= e IPv6 Operations Working Group of the=C2=A0 =0A>> IETF.=0A>> =0A>> =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Title=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Recommend= ations of Using Unique Local Addresses=0A>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Au= thors=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : Bing Liu=0A>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Sheng J= iang=0A>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Filename=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : draft-i= etf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02.txt=0A>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Pages= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : 15=0A>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 Date=C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 : 2014-02-14=0A>> =0A>> Abstract:= =0A>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 This document provides guidance of how to use ULAs. It = analyzes ULA=0A>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 usage scenarios and recommends use cases wh= ere ULA addresses might be=0A>> =C2=A0 =C2=A0 beneficially used.=0A>> =0A>>= =0A>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:=0A>> https://d= atatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommenda=0A>> tions/= =0A>> =0A>> There's also a htmlized version available at:=0A>> http://too= ls.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-=0A>> 02=0A>> = =0A>> A diff from the previous version is available at:=0A>> http://www.i= etf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommenda=0A>> tions-02= =0A>> =0A>> =0A>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from th= e time of =0A>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are availab= le at =0A>> tools.ietf.org.=0A>> =0A>> Internet-Drafts are also available= by anonymous FTP at:=0A>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/=0A>> =0A>> = _______________________________________________=0A>> v6ops mailing list= =0A>> v6ops@ietf.org=0A>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops=0A>= =0A> _______________________________________________=0A> v6ops mailing lis= t=0A> v6ops@ietf.org=0A> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops=0A> __= _____________________________________________=0A> v6ops mailing list=0A> v6= ops@ietf.org=0A> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops=0A> From nobody Sat Mar 15 09:36:37 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1A991A00F9 for ; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vAGSU6-kpBci for ; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-we0-x22d.google.com (mail-we0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C40E71A00EB for ; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id w61so3134040wes.4 for ; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ca1NAqpStQjP7D89oH4mdMdGFUuiJhj0p0m09gEHMAg=; b=XyMxxYMxE0AzsqjfChll7F/PQWdBqTeK2kT/Qe9KvgOh/kqNGvBEpdGwHaviozIs9O m5C1XixtjJiPzCSTsBSS75vE6Ko5nJMUs1fo77wfU3MdsLSYQu7QmkVzAamq/JG3okNZ C8gIKAV2GNavbiVLDtDBcSoTzIxRbSZaG+zMcCemmJoaIc6mtSX62A47y6tfZ2UqnM0n AGUqTHJHuNVMY1TnboIRFvhdPtH2WtyUW+tNMUgmGaq5x48hb1cD9pvAp871tYgoiIUU KPkZ2vffjPmb91VOFlYLAwh4Ws8Xqpv5dkAlPxbF91yrdlTat1b7rLGCtHx/iaT4Wv17 KKIQ== X-Received: by 10.180.205.130 with SMTP id lg2mr2848892wic.59.1394901386082; Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.144] (cpc8-mort6-2-0-cust102.croy.cable.virginm.net. [82.43.108.103]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id fs8sm7362289wib.8.2014.03.15.09.36.24 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:36:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53248195.6000202@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 05:36:37 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fred Baker References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/SPdbHSOQZeddCDm2RRbKjh1Hadc Cc: v6ops@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 16:36:36 -0000 Since I am not a DC operator, I can't really comment on the general value of this document. However, I do want to *strongly* suggest removing the reference to RFC 6294 (of which I am a co-author). The use cases described in that document are mainly incompatible with the flow label standard (RFC 6437). In fact it was just a historical review before we worked on RFC 6437. I also suggest stressing that firewall deployments should provide correct treatment of ICMP (RFC 4890) and extension headers (RFC 7045). Regards Brian On 10/03/2014 07:00, Fred Baker wrote: > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt. > Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested > wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater > issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional > issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the > list. > > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > comment to make. > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > From nobody Sun Mar 16 01:01:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41FEE1A0062 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:01:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8VkVh--HAIbT for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from greed.fud.no (greed.fud.no [IPv6:2a02:c0:1001:100::145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A9C1A004A for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:01:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [2a02:fe0:c410:1030:b6b6:76ff:fe17:2e83] (port=53718 helo=sloth.fud.no) by greed.fud.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WP60E-0002jv-De; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 09:01:02 +0100 Message-ID: <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 09:01:02 +0100 From: Tore Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fred Baker , v6ops@ietf.org References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/fhxYKtSWwXGul8ifwXQximryzsY Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 08:01:15 -0000 * Fred Baker > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt. > Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested > wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater > issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional > issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the > list. > > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > comment to make. Hi, I've read through this document and find it rather low on meat, to be honest. It uses a lot of words, but doesn't say very much. These are just a few examples randomly picked: > Furthermore, the combination of the regularity and controlled > management in a DC interconnection fabric with IPv6 universal end-to- > end addressing should translate in simpler and faster VM migrations, > either intra- or inter-DC, and even inter-provider. Okay...but what about explaining how exactly IPv6 will make VM migration faster? In my experience, this is something that is entirely dependent on available bandwidth, not the IP version. > o During VM migration (intra- or even inter-DC), Mobile IPv6 > mechanisms can be applied to keep service availability during the > transient state. That sounds really cool! But...how? > At this stage, the advantages outlined above on load balancing based > on flow labels and Mobile IP mechanisms are applicable to any L3- > based mechanism (intra- as well as inter-DC). They will translate > into enhanced VM mobility, more effective load balancing, and higher > service availability. Furthermore, the simpler integration provided > by IPv6 to and from the L2 flat space to the structured L3 one can be > applied to achieve simpler deployments, as well as alleviating > encapsulation and fragmentation issues when traversing between L2 and > L3 spaces. Again this fuzzy reference to making novel use of Mobile IP somehow without going into any detail. Oh and what are these "encapsulation and fragmentation issues" that IPv6 purportedly solves? > o Development. When a new device or app version is released, it > must be tested three times: IPv4, dual-stack, and IPv6-only. > Though this does not imply a triple the effort once the > development environment is set up, a general estimate is that it > implies a 10% additional cost. > [...] > o Network management. The incremental costs of managing two L3 > network plane would come at around a 10% incremental cost. > > In summary, a full dual-stack datacenter would come at an additional > 5-10% operating cost than a single-stack one. > [...] > Depending of the complexity of the DC network, provisioning and other > factors we estimate that the extra costs (and later savings) may be > around between 15 to 20%. Where does these percentages come from? There's no reference to a study or anything like that as far as I can tell, so they might as well be pulled out of thin air for all I know. So while I'm all for deploying IPv6 in data centres, I feel this document doesn't really succeed in providing very useful guidance as to how. It's simply lacking the technical details I would expect from an IETF document and I feel that it is at several places making vague or unsubstantiated claims about purported benefits of deploying IPv6, of the kind I'd more expect to see in glossy marketing material. Tore From nobody Sun Mar 16 11:01:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5831A0167 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -115.048 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-115.048 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oAEBez4cV-wG for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mtv-iport-3.cisco.com (mtv-iport-3.cisco.com [173.36.130.14]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 819951A0161 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=129; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1394992848; x=1396202448; h=date:from:message-id:to:subject:cc; bh=4kIRMaErY1jozgSq+oF7sLMWlB9Xgi2sO31pBVcvju4=; b=iZTaGYnVZxaISt/CFCrI1ncklr//EAqWGUkmWI74lzH6YpBvbzVflSTP 1hLFDN86sN5J25z3TfWsdhr1kngESTdyDfU4qkVzebbosyn0nPl6Uv9Nb IPSSQVEvdyOf0q0vlaVpX015dSXDueCya5D1AUxczj96gOFxn3M7SSQMI 8=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag8GAJ7mJVOrRDoI/2dsb2JhbABZgwasaQGWK4EVFnSCSVw8NIhZ0iUXjmgdhCIEiVKhI4NN X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,665,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="105654586" Received: from mtv-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.58.8]) by mtv-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Mar 2014 18:00:30 +0000 Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (irp-view13.cisco.com [171.70.120.60]) by mtv-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2GI0TdA020322 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:00:29 GMT Received: from irp-view13.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2GI0TZo018760; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fred@localhost) by irp-view13.cisco.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4/Submit) id s2GI0Ruc018713; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:00:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Fred Baker Message-Id: <201403161800.s2GI0Ruc018713@irp-view13.cisco.com> To: v6ops@ietf.org Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/W0soAA5DgkOsw2KO8ntOVDI6q7o Subject: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:00:58 -0000 The working group last call for this draft announced last week continues for another week. Please feel free to comment on it. From nobody Sun Mar 16 11:22:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A39A71A016D for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id scf69bLSuLsn for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-vc0-x229.google.com (mail-vc0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D803F1A0167 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-vc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id ik5so4991141vcb.28 for ; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=qoRzXqWdzs6hzsUPsJAwXmhvqxuyKsESvUVFr4qhVds=; b=jzvgss22aLrlC3EsQapTyRbsxawQR6yB1FJzUuXF8pbzxhCM4perRRkcmNCYHQW5hf 6GLQWbyP2Uv1GdEr5fl24m7LVF0e4CTbAivCN6EXbNGqi4/m6rARa3exN1YyAatMDF0b p4OJl3+BxxccHwa1ky1K/mP7ifPtTB9S9/PUiRYUiZCWTLDOurQWIJSIfl94NMNt8+OI e7wRXJS8mI8iP+fjr4kxr1NOpg88xGSOYj4QLZjm8H2KEzdkGxGd4K5TD8qdtOfd5Qm3 HaQ1yit6XtA5eajrllR1UqQeBRPvrO6cHQoWgZ5vWj73Brs2Z77DPy/SsnfJ2F9dgYpQ AXHw== X-Received: by 10.58.202.106 with SMTP id kh10mr50171vec.31.1394994152956; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:32 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.58.105.34 with HTTP; Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> From: Arturo Servin Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 11:22:12 -0700 Message-ID: To: Tore Anderson Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc945ef36af004f4bd626d Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/5vtu7KNbvat9ypIYzM5EkQqRbug Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 18:22:43 -0000 --047d7bdc945ef36af004f4bd626d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Tore, Thanks for the comments. Regarding the percentages. We got some informal input from people by email, conversations; so the numbers are rather empirical. We could even remove the specific number and just say that is more work, empirically between x-y% perhaps to not leaving it too open. But I am not against removing the percentage at all. About the meat, you mentioned some text that is not very clear, do you have some comments about what you consider that we could focus to discuss with the rest of co-authors? Thanks, as On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Tore Anderson wrote: > * Fred Baker > > > This is to initiate a two week working group last call of > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt. > > Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested > > wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater > > issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional > > issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the > > list. > > > > We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the > > document as well as its content. If you have read the document and > > believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important > > comment to make. > > Hi, > > I've read through this document and find it rather low on meat, to be > honest. It uses a lot of words, but doesn't say very much. > > These are just a few examples randomly picked: > > > Furthermore, the combination of the regularity and controlled > > management in a DC interconnection fabric with IPv6 universal end-to- > > end addressing should translate in simpler and faster VM migrations, > > either intra- or inter-DC, and even inter-provider. > > Okay...but what about explaining how exactly IPv6 will make VM migration > faster? In my experience, this is something that is entirely dependent > on available bandwidth, not the IP version. > > > o During VM migration (intra- or even inter-DC), Mobile IPv6 > > mechanisms can be applied to keep service availability during the > > transient state. > > That sounds really cool! But...how? > > > At this stage, the advantages outlined above on load balancing based > > on flow labels and Mobile IP mechanisms are applicable to any L3- > > based mechanism (intra- as well as inter-DC). They will translate > > into enhanced VM mobility, more effective load balancing, and higher > > service availability. Furthermore, the simpler integration provided > > by IPv6 to and from the L2 flat space to the structured L3 one can be > > applied to achieve simpler deployments, as well as alleviating > > encapsulation and fragmentation issues when traversing between L2 and > > L3 spaces. > > Again this fuzzy reference to making novel use of Mobile IP somehow > without going into any detail. Oh and what are these "encapsulation and > fragmentation issues" that IPv6 purportedly solves? > > > o Development. When a new device or app version is released, it > > must be tested three times: IPv4, dual-stack, and IPv6-only. > > Though this does not imply a triple the effort once the > > development environment is set up, a general estimate is that it > > implies a 10% additional cost. > > [...] > > o Network management. The incremental costs of managing two L3 > > network plane would come at around a 10% incremental cost. > > > > In summary, a full dual-stack datacenter would come at an additional > > 5-10% operating cost than a single-stack one. > > [...] > > Depending of the complexity of the DC network, provisioning and other > > factors we estimate that the extra costs (and later savings) may be > > around between 15 to 20%. > > Where does these percentages come from? There's no reference to a study > or anything like that as far as I can tell, so they might as well be > pulled out of thin air for all I know. > > So while I'm all for deploying IPv6 in data centres, I feel this > document doesn't really succeed in providing very useful guidance as to > how. It's simply lacking the technical details I would expect from an > IETF document and I feel that it is at several places making vague or > unsubstantiated claims about purported benefits of deploying IPv6, of > the kind I'd more expect to see in glossy marketing material. > > Tore > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > --047d7bdc945ef36af004f4bd626d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Tore,

Thanks for the comments.

Regarding the percentages. We got some informal input from= people by email, conversations; so the numbers are rather empirical. We co= uld even remove the specific number and just say that is more work, empiric= ally between x-y% perhaps to not leaving it too open. But I am not against = removing the percentage at all.

About the meat, you mentioned some text that is not ver= y clear, do you have some comments about what you consider that we could fo= cus to discuss with the rest of co-authors?

Thanks= ,
as







On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 1:01 AM, Tore Anderson <= tore@fud.no>= wrote:
* Fred Baker

> This is to initiate a two week working group last call of
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.t= xt.
> Please read it now. If you find nits (spelling errors, minor suggested=
> wording changes, etc), comment to the authors; if you find greater
> issues, such as disagreeing with a statement or finding additional
> issues that need to be addressed, please post your comments to the
> list.
>
> We are looking specifically for comments on the importance of the
> document as well as its content. If you have read the document and
> believe it to be of operational utility, that is also an important
> comment to make.

Hi,

I've read through this document and find it rather low on meat, to be honest. It uses a lot of words, but doesn't say very much.

These are just a few examples randomly picked:

> =A0Furthermore, the combination of the regularity and controlled
> =A0management in a DC interconnection fabric with IPv6 universal end-t= o-
> =A0end addressing should translate in simpler and faster VM migrations= ,
> =A0either intra- or inter-DC, and even inter-provider.

Okay...but what about explaining how exactly IPv6 will make VM migration faster? In my experience, this is something that is entirely dependent
on available bandwidth, not the IP version.

> =A0o =A0During VM migration (intra- or even inter-DC), Mobile IPv6
> =A0 =A0 mechanisms can be applied to keep service availability during = the
> =A0 =A0 transient state.

That sounds really cool! But...how?

> =A0At this stage, the advantages outlined above on load balancing base= d
> =A0on flow labels and Mobile IP mechanisms are applicable to any L3- > =A0based mechanism (intra- as well as inter-DC). =A0They will translat= e
> =A0into enhanced VM mobility, more effective load balancing, and highe= r
> =A0service availability. =A0Furthermore, the simpler integration provi= ded
> =A0by IPv6 to and from the L2 flat space to the structured L3 one can = be
> =A0applied to achieve simpler deployments, as well as alleviating
> =A0encapsulation and fragmentation issues when traversing between L2 a= nd
> =A0L3 spaces.

Again this fuzzy reference to making novel use of Mobile IP somehow
without going into any detail. Oh and what are these "encapsulation an= d
fragmentation issues" that IPv6 purportedly solves?

> =A0o =A0Development. =A0When a new device or app version is released, = it
> =A0 =A0 must be tested three times: IPv4, dual-stack, and IPv6-only. > =A0 =A0 Though this does not imply a triple the effort once the
> =A0 =A0 development environment is set up, a general estimate is that = it
> =A0 =A0 implies a 10% additional cost.
> [...]
> =A0o =A0Network management. =A0The incremental costs of managing two L= 3
> =A0 =A0 network plane would come at around a 10% incremental cost.
>
> =A0In summary, a full dual-stack datacenter would come at an additiona= l
> =A05-10% operating cost than a single-stack one.
> [...]
> =A0Depending of the complexity of the DC network, provisioning and oth= er
> =A0factors we estimate that the extra costs (and later savings) may be=
> =A0around between 15 to 20%.

Where does these percentages come from? There's no reference to a study=
or anything like that as far as I can tell, so they might as well be
pulled out of thin air for all I know.

So while I'm all for deploying IPv6 in data centres, I feel this
document doesn't really succeed in providing very useful guidance as to=
how. It's simply lacking the technical details I would expect from an IETF document and I feel that it is at several places making vague or
unsubstantiated claims about purported benefits of deploying IPv6, of
the kind I'd more expect to see in glossy marketing material.

Tore

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--047d7bdc945ef36af004f4bd626d-- From nobody Mon Mar 17 03:26:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275A21A00AE for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 03:26:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l63dk80_j-GP for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 03:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from greed.fud.no (greed.fud.no [IPv6:2a02:c0:1001:100::145]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A6071A00A6 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 03:26:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from echo.ms.redpill-linpro.com ([2a02:c0:100:0:9e8e:99ff:fed1:5243]:33255 helo=echo.linpro.no) by greed.fud.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1WPUk0-00018E-8S; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:25:56 +0100 Message-ID: <5326CDAB.7070308@fud.no> Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:25:47 +0100 From: Tore Anderson User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arturo Servin References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/V5vv0wIkl7sqvM8PaWM4NR7Ze2w Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 10:26:07 -0000 Hi Arturo, > About the meat, you mentioned some text that is not very clear, do you > have some comments about what you consider that we could focus to > discuss with the rest of co-authors? Well, in general I think the document lacks focus on what information it actually trying to convey... I'll do my best to try to explain what I mean. The document revolves around three distinct "stages", right: 1) IPv4-only + IPv6 backwards compat "glue" 2) Dual-stack 3) IPv6-only + IPv4 backwards compat "glue" (BTW: I find "stages" to be rather ill fitting term, as even the document itself points that one stage doesn't necessarily follow another. Maybe "deployment model" or something would be better.) So... Are you trying to provide guidance to operators who does not know which "stage" is best suited for them? If so, that's worth while; objectively list the pros and cons¹ for each, what kind of considerations might completely preclude a "stage" from being chosen, and so on. However, if this is the goal of the document, then I think it would be best to not include too much technical operational guidance in the document itself, to keep it digestible. [1] If you're mentioning a pro or a con isn't immediately obvious to the reader, such as the «IPv6 makes VM migrate faster» claim in the current document, makes sure to provide an explanation, or a reference to an explanation. Otherwise it ends up sounding like marketing fluff, precisely the opposite of what a good document should be (neutral, objective, unbiased, etc.) If on the other hand the point is to provide in-depth technical guidance for the different "stages" (in the case the operator already has already made his choice), I would suggest splitting them out into separate documents - one document per "stage". My reasoning is that if, say, I have already decided to go down the dual-stack path, any preceding text about the "IPv4-only + IPv6 glue" stage is irrelevant and just in the way. I feel that in its current form the document tries to be too many things at once, and as a result doesn't succeed in being very useful at any of them. It could do with a sprinkle of the UNIX philosophy: «Write [I-Ds] that do one thing and do it well». Tore From nobody Mon Mar 17 11:09:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 582351A0430 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:09:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tSczP9XfsVbH for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:09:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from correo-bck.tid.es (correo-bck.tid.es [195.235.93.200]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B121A0449 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 11:09:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sbrightmailg02.hi.inet (Sbrightmailg02.hi.inet [10.95.78.105]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0N2L005ZREF1FG@tid.hi.inet> for v6ops@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 19:09:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from vanvan (vanvan.hi.inet [10.95.78.49]) by sbrightmailg02.hi.inet (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP id 63.A9.05896.C3A37235; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 19:09:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from correo.tid.es (mailhost.hi.inet [10.95.64.100]) by tid.hi.inet (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTPS id <0N2L005ZMEF0FG@tid.hi.inet> for v6ops@ietf.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 19:09:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from EX10-MB2-MAD.hi.inet ([169.254.2.84]) by EX10-HTCAS5-MAD.hi.inet ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 19:08:59 +0100 Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:08:59 +0000 From: "Diego R. Lopez" In-reply-to: <5326CDAB.7070308@fud.no> X-Originating-IP: [10.95.64.115] To: Tore Anderson Message-id: <46F99FD6-34CE-4A7C-936A-A21A53D110AC@tid.es> Content-id: <0FAA6F70A75CC74ABA065207E9738E8A@hi.inet> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Accept-Language: en-US, es-ES Thread-topic: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC Thread-index: AQHPO8GG/sUnZhEr+Uiw7iGaJ+jtPZrjU3gAgACtjQCAAQ05gIAAgWuA X-AuditID: 0a5f4e69-b7f778e000001708-98-53273a3c098c X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmpnkeLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42Lhivcz1LW1Ug82uHGc3eL0sb3MDoweS5b8 ZApgjOKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKuHC8iaVgqmpF24bvLA2Mr2W7GDk5JARMJBb+P88OYYtJXLi3 nq2LkYtDSGAbo0T7733sEM4PRolbyzcwQTjTGCV6/mxlA2lhEVCVODf1KjOIzQZkP2r+DTZK WMBS4mz7M1YQm1NATWLO5rVMECsUJP6ce8wCYosIyEt0npwF1sss4Cexu6OTEcTmBeq9dX4Z VNxMon1vAzNEXFDix+R7LBBxHYne79+gasQlmltvQsW1JZ68uwC2l1FAVuLd/PmsELusJFrP LAK6mQPIdpPoelkFcY6AxJI955khbFGJl4//sUL8uJdR4vbXjUwTGCVmITljFpIzZiE5YxaS M2YhOWMBI+sqRrHipKLM9IyS3MTMnHQDI72MTL3MvNSSTYyQyMvcwbh8p8ohRgEORiUe3hsy 6sFCrIllxZW5hxglOJiVRHglTIBCvCmJlVWpRfnxRaU5qcWHGJk4OKUaGBOaP72LKLfpip7b zhG3rPPaZbHNGZw/KyLXXOg/d9b7WeBtMaPZOQfuvzjFcaKgMX2n1H2Dw0kRMxrbv+9e09XL NNPlZdSFRcv3J214c/K/VPHnKpZ9/eXnt3nsEA1btig/RELh/JHsu383Ch99rJVx3blx7Rdn B+3tEyr2HPYVfRf1fIFA/golluKMREMt5qLiRAAUyGZzmgIAAA== References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> <5326CDAB.7070308@fud.no> Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ZiY_E09IVvUJf8iLwER-rvpSghw Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:09:14 -0000 Hi Tore, I must admit that the document does not go into all the precise technical d= etails I would like it to go. The reason for that is, essentially, that whe= n I started to prepare it I was engaged in a project to build a reference l= ab to demonstrate IPv6 capabilities in different scenarios, being datacente= rs one of them. So I used the document as a placeholder for all possible ad= ditional features we could achieve. The problem is that the project was kil= led without time for making more than the few scenarios that are contemplat= ed in detail, so the others were left as possibilities. We tried to engage = other people who had already experimented with these or other features but = were not successful, I have to admit, for whatever the reason... This said, I still believe the document has the value of providing a framew= ork for the different stages (the name was agreed during one of the first p= resentations of the draft, because there as a common understanding that the= y were to represent an evolution to full-v6 scenarios, not different choice= s), and results of what has already been tested and suggestions in the dire= ction of what should be achieved. Whether this value is enough for publishi= ng it or not is what we are discussing in this last call. Finally, let me say that regarding the costs it is extremely difficult to g= et more details from any operator you ask, unless you go through some kind = of NDA, what makes impossible to publish them anyhow. Be goode, On 17 Mar 2014, at 12:25 , Tore Anderson wrote: > Hi Arturo, > >> About the meat, you mentioned some text that is not very clear, do you >> have some comments about what you consider that we could focus to >> discuss with the rest of co-authors? > > Well, in general I think the document lacks focus on what information it > actually trying to convey... I'll do my best to try to explain what I mea= n. > > The document revolves around three distinct "stages", right: > > 1) IPv4-only + IPv6 backwards compat "glue" > 2) Dual-stack > 3) IPv6-only + IPv4 backwards compat "glue" > > (BTW: I find "stages" to be rather ill fitting term, as even the > document itself points that one stage doesn't necessarily follow > another. Maybe "deployment model" or something would be better.) > > So... > > Are you trying to provide guidance to operators who does not know which > "stage" is best suited for them? If so, that's worth while; objectively > list the pros and cons=B9 for each, what kind of considerations might > completely preclude a "stage" from being chosen, and so on. However, if > this is the goal of the document, then I think it would be best to not > include too much technical operational guidance in the document itself, > to keep it digestible. > > [1] If you're mentioning a pro or a con isn't immediately obvious to the > reader, such as the =ABIPv6 makes VM migrate faster=BB claim in the curre= nt > document, makes sure to provide an explanation, or a reference to an > explanation. Otherwise it ends up sounding like marketing fluff, > precisely the opposite of what a good document should be (neutral, > objective, unbiased, etc.) > > If on the other hand the point is to provide in-depth technical guidance > for the different "stages" (in the case the operator already has already > made his choice), I would suggest splitting them out into separate > documents - one document per "stage". My reasoning is that if, say, I > have already decided to go down the dual-stack path, any preceding text > about the "IPv4-only + IPv6 glue" stage is irrelevant and just in the way= . > > I feel that in its current form the document tries to be too many things > at once, and as a result doesn't succeed in being very useful at any of > them. It could do with a sprinkle of the UNIX philosophy: =ABWrite [I-Ds] > that do one thing and do it well=BB. > > Tore > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops -- "Esta vez no fallaremos, Doctor Infierno" Dr Diego R. Lopez Telefonica I+D http://people.tid.es/diego.lopez/ e-mail: diego@tid.es Tel: +34 913 129 041 Mobile: +34 682 051 091 ----------------------------------------- ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nu= estra pol=EDtica de env=EDo y recepci=F3n de correo electr=F3nico en el enl= ace situado m=E1s abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and re= ceive email on the basis of the terms set out at: http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx From nobody Wed Mar 19 02:19:19 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4BDB1A06A3 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:19:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.925 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.925 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yoh3VpTrLWwf for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ig0-x230.google.com (mail-ig0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9F91A069A for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ig0-f176.google.com with SMTP id uy17so11116301igb.3 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:19:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=Rgdj9cfP9OjA7F8bpU2iA7El5Vln8EBXOw5L4l6JTMg=; b=KOne33WLwzzFK9re8XtYDtQp9uPlUd20TAPUqXk3MXEevnjVwE1K/21A6EY5wB/Id2 nC+9S6mhBs8sdR9RvpyIdL2aYksh8LbQTdBhwx7izzvKhGwptxLgOaEBzo0I5jjaH0hK NFUrdPVJKgLm6pexdCUBunMnLk8fydd0DmZoMlTN/OwGXi1KjE4U+MxLVo9zdPZNdS3g Xr0q+BrdWIFySHvDp+oOa6bMZhDTN6m7sMGvdN2xlG60w2Kh1+bSY8tsl7yY/df/lyZY Ex80Mx4Hf7fXSgMOpT/TQNoJV+BJTIW1TaPmbXR9EILo3onIctzecna8TLXpJjmLMVY9 Sriw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=Rgdj9cfP9OjA7F8bpU2iA7El5Vln8EBXOw5L4l6JTMg=; b=fn7pZbxMhHuNeHatA2Bgu+CdRBXT0A7vWczVuS4OZr+pxle2W2SbGfiE0VFBm0APz7 YiHZYTg7udVKBy0DrS1fOzFyXfVv0+JPhUCKO4vF5VUvX4BwLZ0Qcsznb9TZY3kcsyBd tvMdlYdqPvVmAdgYwvLAa3b2GiMSeGmFi3TMRiROQcRpbcWD+Rv8OiM5kFaB1MJ5NiY1 B7dn72TdxXm8GPgIVcxjhks8tukqJR9RmtdbDQxUOdKEwdX256Uqn0P/PC8xABFIliyo bBJMktrEtRdUb9T+UYtK5nKWs2CHKjvCkJtW/axZPrWcW4SEd3YpZlgzzzvTLh4QJWQC +47w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlgYJMVI3TyGqVvHus7+qWlqv2YBlTbG5qoonzx6vmeNXRRu8Vc6asNKHS9T4O1rfpViaRaOW+SNg5pu20j23EjsoP1U/sOQD0Q21yAcN2cLIyrhcAzaTKGgifPOfVD18PZmG5B6UFO7RJuIoIj5ALjIr0HfhmSvqoYrdyEAtBC7ETq4QscYx+cK6YAsvUAtcgWieoj X-Received: by 10.43.137.5 with SMTP id im5mr11033950icc.55.1395220744497; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:19:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.64.18.136 with HTTP; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 02:18:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <46F99FD6-34CE-4A7C-936A-A21A53D110AC@tid.es> References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> <5326CDAB.7070308@fud.no> <46F99FD6-34CE-4A7C-936A-A21A53D110AC@tid.es> From: Lorenzo Colitti Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 18:18:44 +0900 Message-ID: To: "Diego R. Lopez" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2205cdc0f9704f4f22415 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/AL_AFahui00kUyZlW43SJ1i0I64 Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" , Tore Anderson Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:19:18 -0000 --001a11c2205cdc0f9704f4f22415 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Diego R. Lopez wrote: > I must admit that the document does not go into all the precise technical > details I would like it to go. The reason for that is, essentially, that > when I started to prepare it I was engaged in a project to build a > reference lab to demonstrate IPv6 capabilities in different scenarios, > being datacenters one of them. Am I the only one who has a problem with having a document entitled "IPv6 Operational Guidelines for Datacenters" come out of a project to build a reference lab? --001a11c2205cdc0f9704f4f22415 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= ue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Diego R. Lopez <diego@tid.es> wrot= e:
I must admit that the document does not go into all the precise technical d= etails I would like it to go. The reason for that is, essentially, that whe= n I started to prepare it I was engaged in a project to build a reference l= ab to demonstrate IPv6 capabilities in different scenarios, being datacente= rs one of them.

Am I the only one who has a problem with having a docum= ent entitled "IPv6 Operational Guidelines for Datacenters" come o= ut of a project to build a reference lab?
--001a11c2205cdc0f9704f4f22415-- From nobody Wed Mar 19 09:18:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ADD81A07C3 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:18:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.537 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LiFbO7RrRw56 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AD921A07AD for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2620::930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024] ([IPv6:2620:0:930:0:ca2a:14ff:fe3e:d024]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2JGFSmM012941 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:15:28 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2JGFSmM012941 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1395245731; bh=nTiJqMyvFQ9/mb5syGI28Oee+vs=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=GYTMyZCctYXBGZn9tfbU/wj2PJdvr9gRj/ZbUaN9IhWrZuglI+nfqpfZ4dWf5tcK8 xPp6QiMKTW/CPZELsEYJ99leKUuYSr0C28ZTcajdOytw0eK+vZnz8N6PUoHT/svwWt AEfb531E7/nHkWh8uJML3uZzKRfw+CRpw+ppu11c= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C0EB0CA7-911F-4347-B124-02BC51DA2922" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:10:08 -0700 Message-Id: References: <201403091800.s29I0Nmx001211@irp-view13.cisco.com> <53255A3E.6060001@fud.no> <5326CDAB.7070308@fud.no> <46F99FD6-34CE-4A7C-936A-A21A53D110AC@tid.es> To: Lorenzo Colitti X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]); Wed, 19 Mar 2014 09:15:31 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Jr1-kdPmrGJFWnhlzoZBJwqWgo4 Cc: "v6ops@ietf.org" , Tore Anderson Subject: Re: [v6ops] draft-ietf-v6ops-dc-ipv6-01.txt WGLC X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 16:18:12 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C0EB0CA7-911F-4347-B124-02BC51DA2922 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Mar 19, 2014, at 02:18 , Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Diego R. Lopez wrote: > I must admit that the document does not go into all the precise = technical details I would like it to go. The reason for that is, = essentially, that when I started to prepare it I was engaged in a = project to build a reference lab to demonstrate IPv6 capabilities in = different scenarios, being datacenters one of them. >=20 > Am I the only one who has a problem with having a document entitled = "IPv6 Operational Guidelines for Datacenters" come out of a project to = build a reference lab? No... You are not alone. Owen > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --Apple-Mail=_C0EB0CA7-911F-4347-B124-02BC51DA2922 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
On Mar 19, 2014, at 02:18 , Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> wrote:

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Diego R. Lopez <diego@tid.es> wrote:
I must admit that the document does not go into all the precise technical details I would like it to go. The reason for that is, essentially, that when I started to prepare it I was engaged in a project to build a reference lab to demonstrate IPv6 capabilities in different scenarios, being datacenters one of them.

Am I the only one who has a problem with having a document entitled "IPv6 Operational Guidelines for Datacenters" come out of a project to build a reference lab?

No... You are not alone.

Owen

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--Apple-Mail=_C0EB0CA7-911F-4347-B124-02BC51DA2922-- From nobody Fri Mar 21 09:51:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E8991A08F0 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9bJYxrwMeOQ7 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wi0-x22f.google.com (mail-wi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADCD41A0457 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id cc10so697600wib.14 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zYqgmXUBMbBZeQrpyWdDRvwRiLrElvG0/D3yF4LnnQo=; b=jQloG2bQugZfgI4Q1QMX9OHf0S8+3zlNTStHEA/sBvy10t0FNgJ6SQFdpY7zy7th23 sshWB/wQ/X5xs7lOPBhD+bP2K1RXZ5BB3XHoVLixM+8P09iS+deHbuxwqvnYtImcrjou zAhSrnE49WPoXiAZLvwOn6kPmZJ3Ebi3ekyFnMN/d+2jRG5l4dlgXCzJil7j9bxiGuhv jdDgI1+ZndOBSdij/m9M0oPRdom4CICm1UEQu7lrzEDaUyqBrDEt+TIP9/BUB+iV1yci 22D5vHNfFpf9CrIuC5uz6JfFvSVTyTBPmcUlNMZZSX06VyunVrJPkl9uImXI5NlmeOLl o8Nw== X-Received: by 10.180.188.229 with SMTP id gd5mr3749397wic.54.1395420676955; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.7] (cpc8-mort6-2-0-cust102.croy.cable.virginm.net. [82.43.108.103]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v6sm6623466wif.0.2014.03.21.09.51.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Mar 2014 09:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 05:51:28 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IPv6 Operations Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/bvQxoYsZgh5ondDFiittDq1BXmU Subject: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:51:30 -0000 Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: https://www.dropbox.com/s/doazzo5ygu3idna/WorldIPv6Congress-IPv6_LH%20v2.pdf Regards Brian From nobody Fri Mar 21 10:09:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30BCF1A09EC for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.749 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nx6_DmRFR4KA for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oa0-x22c.google.com (mail-oa0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::22c]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE08D1A09C1 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id n16so2849148oag.17 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=CgPT8u3cdsJ34Gl5/PJINkwHbXNzkU9iTftNquAnKMI=; b=xD6mzXOmdaVk3Vj4ndbS0ywe0ttd/c2wwf/z9wqWdDx0BVv+XaS30YKkpecpftuBJK dTb4MlK9H2fSf0QfRIvf8Lhjrrm3YsSj3F6WcVtjshS5zpESPcSCRse4s+Ngaay93kgX TACbCYY+z/77k5Nq7aKLV/XaQWCD2qNjHz6L4CMcRlQhjDNsx4XviwfDG6tgLfCy98Ww 6906WaQQuH03RYIwhCDCZMpXuH6G8sR3AKDJrJoEkHdTNPqirMjroGo3OQpp64dpiwvq 5BQbzAf+UawN11yx+nZTjDZWTXbrcfbbkavFmgHbtNL0yvCS8kJFhXeD6Yg3J5Q94SXv PdQA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.229.228 with SMTP id st4mr44068882oec.16.1395421757424; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.68 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.153.68 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:09:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:09:17 +0000 Message-ID: From: Nabil Benamar To: Brian E Carpenter , v6ops@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11362fb029d0d904f520f291 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-ewOfQs_vWA76tvQ6OVISq0WyOs Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:09:32 -0000 --001a11362fb029d0d904f520f291 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mar 21, 2014 5:07 PM, "Nabil Benamar" wrote: > Thank you Brian for sharing this valuable presentation ! > On Mar 21, 2014 4:52 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" > wrote: > >> Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots >> of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: >> >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/s/doazzo5ygu3idna/WorldIPv6Congress-IPv6_LH%20v2.pdf >> >> Regards >> Brian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> > --001a11362fb029d0d904f520f291 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Mar 21, 2014 5:07 PM, "Nabil Benamar&quo= t; <benamar73@gmail.com> w= rote:

Thank you Brian for sharing this valuable presentation !

On Mar 21, 2014 4:52 PM, "Brian E Carpenter= " <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots
of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/doazzo5ygu3idna/W= orldIPv6Congress-IPv6_LH%20v2.pdf

Regards
=A0 =A0Brian

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
--001a11362fb029d0d904f520f291-- From nobody Fri Mar 21 10:53:47 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D0901A08DC for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.447 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IYnF6ZBrHnSO for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61FD21A03BF for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AE2B1B89BD for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-01.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF935190043; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-01.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:35 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 13:53:35 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> To: Brian E Carpenter X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/dPxRFvw6u_Yq-EZQfvUhQKSXkeM Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:53:46 -0000 On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: > Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots > of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: I hadn't seen it. Thanks for the pointer=97you are right, it was very = interesting. From nobody Thu Mar 27 12:29:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833321A0333 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mWCFSvlewYZv for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-x22d.google.com (mail-pd0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22d]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD291A01D8 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id z10so3776080pdj.18 for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=wSKclcS2XMk4yaUB6Zd3qatxLGIIQ2f/FQ8qckNV1wA=; b=vQz0PSa//bZuZRExgSumQwajD9NFBL3kuAFhyiAJZ4zoGTIDk/CawlTjr3RclpnJel iqCSu2VNZ9e1wbwz2kwHwiKkecrQVAxhoxsxEmkETOgWswnIuY66bLtjrilzQskQ2+VZ lDpYhK0GthWBU7kaCcynnfgzvEd4QTafxBqsWtHBiMdsirpfcZfcOgl0lbEdN0FmseL6 SGhsjSw3PlgHC0Tr/VbJFCRggSwN2+7uCeyyOJlhOZnE3rMalMCMMWOr4ePu8KUeX4Ml B7OaiTNPlmNpH4D9+YlyHXufTqc5xvnd7HWpbLJLZoxrUaGH2Odpi8IICO/QZpEhAoLg UY+Q== X-Received: by 10.68.171.4 with SMTP id aq4mr3782617pbc.150.1395948584599; Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.23] (70.200.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.200.70]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nc1sm12620816pbc.32.2014.03.27.12.29.42 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Mar 2014 12:29:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <53347C28.1080401@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 08:29:44 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IPv6 Operations References: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20140306184438.13208.54681.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/RlW8BXkRrCm5AMLjBLTvmfBfjg8 Subject: Re: [v6ops] I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-design-choices-01.txt X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 19:29:47 -0000 Hi, The draft refers to ULAs a few times but doesn't cite RFC 4193. Also, consider citing draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations. Brian From nobody Sun Mar 30 19:59:18 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDF501A0936 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:59:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LYafGrep2h_E for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22b.google.com (mail-yh0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4A8F1A0934 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f43.google.com with SMTP id b6so7014705yha.2 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:59:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=xi5QcxNv6kXYOWT42kmHeQYPoojkY5o42cpOYYpauEk=; b=TJCF2J56MI++XUOuHYautCwYoHNf2mxjML/daW5fHQjZO6iGDjeFfrPbzv+ei7hNCB Hv6s/d2xUwG2IAXLM7DEVXzUvzJdBkMFYz37jHhebElTJAXmu6fL0RyAFiwYB7rGfsDe ycUksPdrvwwRUY4GrEeOj7P9D6lyw8XhREEW8Fox46CT5bD+qVrMxiIV4nukZPqUclYf tUj5EHml1nAXwHDvz3yo11pFgqyQP6zJD7ylQDxFmTBdpumX6wonNZsqSmTSMvmm2da8 Q+cZK4SyrzIQbKnZIUESsVE4WBWaeAXuxldmX/mkLWV6B+lF51wyAOBPMD9BwXYdvqAC a1kA== X-Received: by 10.236.89.3 with SMTP id b3mr33036159yhf.54.1396234751751; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:59:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.170.189.19 with HTTP; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 19:58:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> From: "Mukom Akong T." Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 06:58:31 +0400 Message-ID: To: Ted Lemon Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300e511966d8ef04f5de3ca0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/pEmNHUukZv3fm0NETUaWegKIGXI Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 02:59:17 -0000 --20cf300e511966d8ef04f5de3ca0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The best part for me in the presentation (don't know if it's in the slides) was this a) No product can go live if it doesn't support IPv6 b) Take away IPv4 from the environment in which devs work That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first before IPv4. On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > > Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots > > of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: > > I hadn't seen it. Thanks for the pointer=E2=80=94you are right, it was = very > interesting. > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > --=20 Mukom Akong T. http://about.me/perfexcellence | twitter: @perfexcellent ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= --------------------------------------------------------------- =E2=80=9CWhen you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whisperin= g of the hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------- --20cf300e511966d8ef04f5de3ca0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The best part for me in the presentation (don't know i= f it's in the slides) was this

a) No product can go = live if it doesn't support IPv6

b) Take away I= Pv4 from the environment in which devs work

That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first be= fore IPv4.


On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon <<= a href=3D"mailto:ted.lemon@nominum.com" target=3D"_blank">ted.lemon@nominum= .com> wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM= , Brian E Carpenter <bria= n.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots
> of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to:

I hadn't seen it. =C2=A0 Thanks for the pointer=E2=80=94you are r= ight, it was very interesting.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops



--
=
Mukom Akong T.

http://about.me/perfexcellence | =C2=A0twitter: @perfexcell= ent
---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------
=E2=80= =9CWhen you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of t= he hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran
---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------------------------------------
--20cf300e511966d8ef04f5de3ca0-- From nobody Sun Mar 30 20:32:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1AD1A0963 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iS95CDQu2luU for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B5741A0961 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id p9so5229883lbv.24 for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=b83oKVYGvks0xal9ijHH6T+ntX/IEdKMblpnt79HGng=; b=vj6IXqBxQ4GcYuQzp4Veh4pHZEZdDqggp0t2RVuyHdaJO+QCGM+b7V+HcsGnicXOgH Au49PEBYGJDyGp+fRoHAhqTrdZWFlWxTG9nIXLBDZD5HWZA9nFpo2S5Vg8xzefbd0+Zt u3SBvDkzDrTgqknrBr44DEGsaxbzZSBV5O35TNnNP4alVKu48MMsxMV31U5gRU1tGWKq HrhTNxA/CUOHWIfyRgsvINIAoyngeSBtpW2KxYdoRzeEPXv2NUFnpritBZ7CUR3luyxZ OBA5O7lS+SJV+ejkTBBTmH8K1gE8rMOq5Qw89G5wNa7sUoDgMwPkp0NZDRe2Le9l8S8J 9zEQ== X-Received: by 10.112.1.233 with SMTP id 9mr4143933lbp.29.1396236705000; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.199.37 with HTTP; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 20:31:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> From: Mohammad Aazam Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:03 +0500 Message-ID: To: "Mukom Akong T." Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae94edbd3d2f41504f5deb0ef Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/c7gGmVzfnlmWnifySFlkYwB5yDk Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 03:31:56 -0000 --14dae94edbd3d2f41504f5deb0ef Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, Respected v6ops Members, What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. Regards, Mohammad Aazam www.aazamcs.com On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Mukom Akong T. wrote: > The best part for me in the presentation (don't know if it's in the > slides) was this > > a) No product can go live if it doesn't support IPv6 > > b) Take away IPv4 from the environment in which devs work > > That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first before IPv4. > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon wrote: > >> On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter < >> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots >> > of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: >> >> I hadn't seen it. Thanks for the pointer--you are right, it was very >> interesting. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >> > > > > -- > > Mukom Akong T. > > http://about.me/perfexcellence | twitter: @perfexcellent > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "When you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of > the hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > > -- "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." - Chinese Proverb. Regards, Mohammad Aazam --14dae94edbd3d2f41504f5deb0ef Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

Respected v6ops Members,

What if we first think ab= out QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration towards IPv6 would require = tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 completely takes over from IP= v4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead would affect the overall effi= ciency and data delivery.

= Regards,
Mohammad Aazam
www.aazamcs.com


On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at= 7:58 AM, Mukom Akong T. <mukom.tamon@gmail.com> wrote:<= br>
The best part for me in the= presentation (don't know if it's in the slides) was this

<= /div>
a) No product can go live if it doesn't support IPv6
b) Take away IPv4 from the environment in which devs work

That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first be= fore IPv4.

On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon = <ted.lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Brian E C= arpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots
> of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to:

I hadn't seen it.   Thanks for the pointer—you are rig= ht, it was very interesting.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops



<= /div>--

Mukom Akong = T.

http= ://about.me/perfexcellence |  twitter: @perfexcellent
---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------
“W= hen you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of the h= ours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran
---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops




--
"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time= is now." - Chinese Proverb.
Regards,
Mohammad Aazam
--14dae94edbd3d2f41504f5deb0ef-- From nobody Sun Mar 30 21:33:21 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B6EB1A094C for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:33:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UVku0t-bY3Ih for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74DBA1A093E for ; Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.6.139] (ip-64-134-145-174.public.wayport.net [64.134.145.174]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2V4UsdO017990 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:31:49 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2V4UsdO017990 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396240311; bh=r5B4EQuXCjq4vJEpnqqLmw09n2E=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=rpWRyqiSuqGj+1RO05m4NZozchgvWurxqJ0TeLSFDedjbZnQ+kKNhFjThrIHc0CMg qsDLkz+luXdYP7MPVk5HKy75+HbYI4H/i8pm9MvLQcOFoPQD6G4QPtC/7RybIvPCeT 4NPS91+BTbGR0R0YMOW6XwunIeyEenrU0WcbbC8M= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ACAD97A7-A54C-4ABD-BDFE-9FF9BB0460E2" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:31:45 -0700 Message-Id: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> To: Mohammad Aazam X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Sun, 30 Mar 2014 21:31:51 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/8XAUJhmfn8-Ftq63AWPpa4uBBUk Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:33:16 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_ACAD97A7-A54C-4ABD-BDFE-9FF9BB0460E2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Actually, tunnel usage is a tiny fraction of a percent of IPv6 traffic = already today. While there are some tunnels in use, the use of tunnels = has been dramatically reduced and continues to decline. Owen On Mar 30, 2014, at 8:31 PM, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > Hi, >=20 > Respected v6ops Members, >=20 > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6 completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 = tunneling overhead would affect the overall efficiency and data = delivery. >=20 > Regards, > Mohammad Aazam > www.aazamcs.com >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Mukom Akong T. = wrote: > The best part for me in the presentation (don't know if it's in the = slides) was this >=20 > a) No product can go live if it doesn't support IPv6 >=20 > b) Take away IPv4 from the environment in which devs work >=20 > That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first before IPv4. >=20 >=20 > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon = wrote: > On Mar 21, 2014, at 12:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: > > Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots > > of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to: >=20 > I hadn't seen it. Thanks for the pointer=97you are right, it was = very interesting. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Mukom Akong T. >=20 > http://about.me/perfexcellence | twitter: @perfexcellent=09 > = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---------------------------------------------------------------- > =93When you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering = of the hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran > = --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > --=20 > "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time = is now." - Chinese Proverb.=20 >=20 > Regards, > Mohammad Aazam > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --Apple-Mail=_ACAD97A7-A54C-4ABD-BDFE-9FF9BB0460E2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Actually, tunnel usage is a tiny fraction of a = percent of IPv6 traffic already today. While there are some tunnels in = use, the use of tunnels has been dramatically reduced and continues to = decline.

Owen

On Mar 30, = 2014, at 8:31 PM, Mohammad Aazam <aazam.cs@gmail.com> = wrote:

Hi,

Respected v6ops = Members,

What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? = Because migration towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable = period, until IPv6 completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, = IPv6 tunneling overhead would affect the overall efficiency and data = delivery.

Regards,
Mohammad = Aazam
www.aazamcs.com


On Mon, Mar 31, = 2014 at 7:58 AM, Mukom Akong T. <mukom.tamon@gmail.com> wrote:
The = best part for me in the presentation (don't know if it's in the slides) = was this

a) No product can go live if it doesn't support = IPv6

b) Take away IPv4 from the environment in = which devs work

That is certainly forcing people to think IPv6 first = before IPv4.


On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at = 9:53 PM, Ted Lemon <ted.lemon@nominum.com> wrote:
On Mar 21, 2014, = at 12:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> Apologies if this is old news, but there is lots
> of meat in this talk that Robert Watson just pointed me to:

I hadn't seen it.   Thanks for the pointer=97you are right, = it was very interesting.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops



--

Mukom Akong T.

http://about.me/perfexcellence |  twitter: = @perfexcellent
= --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------------------------------------------------
=93Whe= n you work, you are the FLUTE through whose lungs the whispering of the = hours turns to MUSIC" - Kahlil Gibran
= --------------------------------------------------------------------------= -----------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops




--
"The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is = now." - Chinese Proverb.
Regards,
Mohammad Aazam
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing = list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops

= --Apple-Mail=_ACAD97A7-A54C-4ABD-BDFE-9FF9BB0460E2-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 04:35:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD84E1A06EF for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:35:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MwicI8tFrRu1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:35:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 304971A0704 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:35:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EF31602E5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:35:42 +0200 (CEST) X-SpaceNet-Relay: true Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EC4A6025A for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:35:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 99830 invoked by uid 1007); 31 Mar 2014 13:35:42 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:35:42 +0200 From: Gert Doering To: Mohammad Aazam Message-ID: <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-NCC-RegID: de.space User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/sUmcRfMRLKuD-mAkfUeS4-7IRvg Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:35:48 -0000 Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:08:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47B11A0A6F for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:08:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ftt38o7bkL0J for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm4-vm9.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm4-vm9.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D289B1A083D for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.162] by nm4.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:08:32 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.140] by tm8.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:08:32 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1016.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:08:32 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 539895.5163.bm@omp1016.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 96174 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 14:08:31 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396274911; bh=VmI1+2xcyVsjtkr1NkQKAPvaUOQf6oY7fss/iOIw6zM=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=xGa8tQae1ALqISvdP+nOONV5XXkaTjHkMAbaML50YQ876gF/+xmU4QoIK8YOm3yjVNnz0zdO+THqe6ioE6PGVkkCYcGfnNJFz9I3+18jom4eVUMajnx235ic25xEg1+xOymrMfsF5ofXCeQD2XnT4M4lFlnnTZFbmIDaXCWCQiA= X-YMail-OSG: LEsiVkoVM1kxiVm5Be70kZr.qiFLwP9JU6YMcsPWDEus2K8 qdiosYPOoCAszS7PRFXkn94WcphigzHppubDnbCyrTQAvZMYdpJRL6_TeuEf pjSVz7JWO93upRMgwM0pyRGUmDAoAvLobbY.oknYXKWEM_WqbOQdeC4rjGKJ ilAiet9KK65eIblzHmbMssCddvoEtfsFjCZOzAe9CyRtWV7_Mp9MZ78_I9Fq K6oEOEKBcTeswb1QD8nxRkyevpXnrK_gm7V_sDSpynuBMNG.VXoGdzQh1rfs kG2SUoOTuMyoAaH5ju9Rsiol1dIrmfafP4rGIPo1WpWxtstq.0_4KrHwos7Z pAvoqh38fbdnb59VQ.Bi09Sjvb_D4WpKwJGUHoB_l9z971qAF5fq0q2bsNm6 uF99BykNwB2iqEM8XqUZCdy3B7XXuMGEaobLtaHwCmGrT3taYHxO1rysC8N8 T5oIzqa3Hjk8.Muu57Rw5YnelCkEiDazDEdyhDylux7kx9eim1eSjq8_sI.M 6ik0uuIUlCgaPmiDS4ihPbzz3y.hmriMSa0AwIK96ZiTEQ6NY.sqZF_kAtP5 q84PW5qDkgzIJ417C.DCrJkyVn8UI1gkZbKkQncOctkrHsesi54WQtbd2Zsr I Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:08:31 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgpPbiBNb24sIE1hciAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAwODozMTowM0FNICswNTAwLCBNb2hhbW1hZCBBYXphbSB3cm90ZToKPiBXaGF0IGlmIHdlIGZpcnN0IHRoaW5rIGFib3V0IFFvUyBwcm92aXNpb25pbmcgaW4gSVB2Nj8gQmVjYXVzZSBtaWdyYXRpb24KPiB0b3dhcmRzIElQdjYgd291bGQgcmVxdWlyZSB0dW5uZWxpbmcgZm9yIGEgcmVhc29uYWJsZSBwZXJpb2QsIHVudGlsIElQdjYKPiBjb21wbGV0ZWx5IHRha2VzIG92ZXIgZnJvbSBJUHY0LiBEdXJpbmcgdGhhdCB0aW1lLCBJUHY2IHR1bm5lbGluZyBvdmVyaGUBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> Message-ID: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:08:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: Gert Doering , Mohammad Aazam In-Reply-To: <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/HMoT5W5-7aVHmOHCouZD14K_c70 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:08:38 -0000 =0A=0AOn Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:=0A> W= hat if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration=0A>= towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6= =0A> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling over= head=0A> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.=0A=0A>The p= eriod for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.=0A=0AYou have got to = be kidding. =A0 Most large enterprises are just starting to learn to spell = IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their 5-year plan ye= t. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations.=0A=0AAt home,=A0I certainly can'= t get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP or ANY ISP without paying huge a= mounts of money. =A0 When our engineers do IPv6 testing over the Internet w= e use IPv4 / IPv6 =A0tunneling.=0A=0AJust trying to inject a little reality= into the conversation.=0A=0AThanks,=0A=0ANalini Elkins=0AInside Products, = Inc.=0A(831) 659-8360=0Awww.insidethestack.com From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:26:54 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EBC71A6EF0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KAA_pGGy3bue for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x22e.google.com (mail-la0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F39271A0A1B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f46.google.com with SMTP id hr17so5792918lab.5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=VyShdECrKdLgyHJpAvcSUOj3+qQRMXr3IH2AYwm43Xw=; b=KFkShahpenLz3jjHWGMg2fsXjehCr+Vetuc/EtfzQKDPnImLXGUzi3IUbh1mOlk5dO VXIWkrA2yiAUzXDhIIhEtImYylLAFDCowFjYKQAALdYNNFKcKdqf/BkdML0iViE9jtAl UX72Y3RmpyJ2fyM99DJJzB70br6O6MWenobpxs0PsxTS2kkoSJoq+PRLjtIjY3Ws5Sxl Eg9h15bwxJ59xiy+nKPXG0/65I/7ff+zay4Yb3+kZBgha5fBQ7cjVdhLrC7KeP2O4hLR inuZVX/7jnZCq2ERkihexiRPq3w1BDaZzvD17cAyHxYXflKSSNLIJSnHloEN4nBT8GTo jpxA== X-Received: by 10.152.166.198 with SMTP id zi6mr9737lab.73.1396276006164; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.112.199.37 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:26:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> From: Mohammad Aazam Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:26:05 +0500 Message-ID: To: Gert Doering Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1137f60a5b1d7b04f5e7d740 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/fvOZpwgdBRmcx3SGLd8XiA28Me4 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:26:52 -0000 --001a1137f60a5b1d7b04f5e7d740 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, If this is the case, then how incompatible traffic is routed through a network? If I'm on IPv6, how my traffic would be routed through the core? Since core is not yet completely on IPv6. On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling > overhead > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. > > The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. > > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > -- "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." - Chinese Proverb. Regards, Mohammad Aazam --001a1137f60a5b1d7b04f5e7d740 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

If this is the case, then how incompatible traffic is routed = through a network? If I'm on IPv6, how my traffic would be routed throu= gh the core? Since core is not yet completely on IPv6.


O= n Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> = wrote:
Hi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:
> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migrati= on
> towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IP= v6
> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling over= head
> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.

The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.

Gert Doering
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Vorstand: Sebast= ian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundne= r-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 HRB: 136055 (AG Muench= en)
Tel: = +49 (0)89/32356-444 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279



--
&= quot;The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The secon= d best time is now." - Chinese Proverb.
Regards,
Mohammad Aazam
--001a1137f60a5b1d7b04f5e7d740-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:28:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA031A6EF5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:27:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id otGJtw5k6ezP for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.sbone.de (bird.sbone.de [46.4.1.90]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAB6B1A0A3F for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:27:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.sbone.de (mail.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C9C125D3A93; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:27:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68487C22B81; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:27:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sbone.de Received: from mail.sbone.de ([IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:587]) by content-filter.sbone.de (content-filter.sbone.de [fde9:577b:c1a9:31::2013:2742]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eARxOmc7VkJm; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:27:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4420:cabc:c8ff:fe8b:4fe6] (unknown [IPv6:fde9:577b:c1a9:4420:cabc:c8ff:fe8b:4fe6]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.sbone.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C134C22B99; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:27:48 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:27:46 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Nalini Elkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/KmF8PZCoEcxYWVIs-QWo_M_Yckw Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:28:00 -0000 On 31 Mar 2014, at 14:08 , Nalini Elkins = wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: >> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration >> towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until = IPv6 >> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead >> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. >=20 >> The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. Maybe till 2002/2003. I still remember a lot of tunnelling from back = then. Certainly there was enough connectivity around that one didn=92t = need it anymore in a well connected place. > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just starting = to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not even in = their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. Until one of their major suppliers in Asia says =93and by tomorrow = please do all this over IPv6=94. I am still waiting for a publicly = known case of this. Certainly no one will switch over night but no IPv6 = at all in the next five years for a major company is not realistic = anymore. There will be surprises. > At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP or = ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money. When our engineers do = IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 tunnelling. I think there are two types of ISPs left without IPv6; the ones that = just won=92t do it, and the ones that would love to give it to you but = just cannot until they are confident with their deployment working = edge-to-edge. The number of the latter seems to increase, the number of = the former might cease to exist in one way or the other in a couple of = years. > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. I think what Gert was trying to say is that in places that matter = tunnels are gone. The vast majority of the IPv6 core connectivity = should run without any tunnels involved these days. What happens at the = edge is, as you point out, a different story but numbers show a static = increase in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost assume the = it=92s =93geeks waiting patiently prodding people every other week=94 = and =93people who really need it but had no other choice on short = notice=94 who are on tunnels, and that=92s it. Bjoern =97=20 Bjoern A. Zeeb ????????? ??? ??????? ??????: '??? ??? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????', ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.??? From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:30:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7CD71A6EF7 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:29:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.861 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.861 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hQk9Qdzldmwq for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:29:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (swm.pp.se [212.247.200.143]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE5361A6F01 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:29:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id A2C41A2; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:29:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99BE09C; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:29:53 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:29:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Mohammad Aazam In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/zpIfJtQxN8gxRYE7iscus7v2wAc Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:30:00 -0000 On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > If this is the case, then how incompatible traffic is routed through a > network? If I'm on IPv6, how my traffic would be routed through the > core? Since core is not yet completely on IPv6. It would be helpful if you explained your world view and why you're writing what you're writing. It seems you're making assumptions others aren't agreeing with. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:44:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61BFF1A6EF1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gg3CnQhnsa0m for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm4-vm2.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm4-vm2.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.32]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20051A0A24 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.170] by nm4.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:44:22 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.248] by tm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:44:22 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1019.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:44:22 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 651188.86926.bm@omp1019.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 39395 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 14:44:21 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396277061; bh=XoIKA1poCekCH4/c6/eDv3A8MZQK+AzRUN1sIe6eSmA=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=CY52zAJxnjBSFSgxy7s3CPaeXc0OGznhHKUfi4VuvPrAoYHc5AcwM6Ib7nK/kVicskw61R8tz7EsEvVHqMCL/JlIDoxSvWc+mGHCelztk5z/o5/2eOEQE6/XUV4xF4L1l6I919O8ClnIQdBekOAtJhRYHB/zp8rh0OORC5lROCs= X-YMail-OSG: Y95KY88VM1lFKMvrFbgSh5MZuYs1FawG_3qkh8uS6iF12F4 d0Z0DiRXV3rBheK0NWI82aau7fhdMDmtYwsn_hp5D2wvvBVF.Md1OSEQaLat zzS5pGQHs0nqM_4U6SzH5TadhxFi7r5aKubTiiMxBiRRkapyzsb_hPAkKDyq McTlgWaP8F4AsTgUmpDv76B8pvmfghHCG1pzoHJdDNPkfPqsbCcOUMn.VC1I iArgFpwkVyHI3eToekXc2trZSGz9i4qK8JQq_BVTz8xUUnuCwrR0I8mYfzwh V7_P.3_M91U3T6WEIm_jc8Q6vI_1bXyhq6NIBMXbzn5tuGVxv4YvFhcFJdFM dusZszYvQUC_HlnUQkfuinXM0ng2z7564Nl5U6AK4eKymgzvPhdQKWEj11Rh jX6ohK_6bxRQ884F6adyCZmlOvoa1sVhID6Ao96qfNYoBHeeyYlogp6dK9H2 6VrAK4a3V5ANu9WzQGlndPkRTJfqDS1Vx_dJwayKManiuyLmpam8_.yCzHGh TIDhGW9TJ6YaZNg2g6kz.oBhjrLiCHgujbZPgYGASEg-- Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:21 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, Cgo.PiBBdCBob21lLCBJIGNlcnRhaW5seSBjYW4ndCBnZXQgSVB2NiBuYXRpdmUgY29ubmVjdGl2aXR5IGZyb20gbXkgSVNQIG9yIEFOWSBJU1Agd2l0aG91dCBwYXlpbmcgaHVnZSBhbW91bnRzIG9mIG1vbmV5LsKgICBXaGVuIG91ciBlbmdpbmVlcnMgZG8gSVB2NiB0ZXN0aW5nIG92ZXIgdGhlIEludGVybmV0IHdlIHVzZSBJUHY0IC8gSVB2NsKgIHR1bm5lbGxpbmcuCgo.SSB0aGluayB0aGVyZSBhcmUgdHdvIHR5cGVzIG9mIElTUHMgbGVmdCB3aXRob3V0IElQdjY7wqAgdGhlIG9uZXMgdGhhdCBqdXN0IHcBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" In-Reply-To: <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-153701192-1188484595-1396277061=:74347" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/5hJUmZXStFUaV4Q_A8Kq-pocFwM Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:44:30 -0000 ---153701192-1188484595-1396277061=:74347 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0A=0A>> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my IS= P or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money.=C2=A0 When our engineer= s do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6=C2=A0 tunnelling.=0A= =0A>I think there are two types of ISPs left without IPv6;=C2=A0 the ones t= hat just won=E2=80=99t do it, and the ones that would love to give it to yo= u but just cannot until they are confident with their deployment working ed= ge-to-edge.=C2=A0 The number of >the latter seems to increase, the number o= f the former might cease to exist in one way or the other in a couple of ye= ars.=0A=0AThe ISP to my home is Comcast. =C2=A0Just saying. =C2=A0Seems dou= btful that they will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in th= e US.=0A=0A>> Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.= =0A=0A>I think what Gert was trying to say is that in places that matter tu= nnels are gone.=C2=A0 The vast majority of the IPv6 core connectivity shoul= d run without any tunnels involved these days.=C2=A0 What happens at the ed= ge is, as you point out, a >different story but numbers show a static incre= ase in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost assume the it=E2=80=99= s =E2=80=9Cgeeks waiting patiently prodding people every other week=E2=80= =9D and =E2=80=9Cpeople who really need it but had no other choice=0A>on sh= ort notice=E2=80=9D who are on tunnels, and that=E2=80=99s it.=0A=0AWe will= ignore the "edge" at our peril.=C2=A0=0A=0ABTW, I happen to be an IPv6 big= ot and prod all end user corporations who will listen (and many who would p= refer not to!) to start the IPv6 conversion. =C2=A0(And have done so for th= e last 5 years.) =C2=A0My cries have often fallen on deaf ears.=0A=0A=0ABjo= ern=0A=0A=E2=80=94 =0ABjoern A. Zeeb=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ????????? ??? = ??????? ??????:=0A'??? ??? ???? ??????=C2=A0 ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? = ??? ????? ????? ????=0A?????? ?? ????? ????',=C2=A0 ????????? ?????????, "?= ?? ????? ?? ?????", ?.??? ---153701192-1188484595-1396277061=:74347 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 n= ative connectivity from my ISP or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of mo= ney.  When our engineers do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv= 4 / IPv6  tunnelling.

>I think there are two types of ISPs l= eft without IPv6;  the ones that just won=E2=80=99t do it, and the one= s that would love to give it to you but just cannot until they are confiden= t with their deployment working edge-to-edge.  The number of >the l= atter seems to increase, the number of the former might cease to exist in o= ne way or the other in a couple of years.

The ISP= to my home is Comcast.  Just saying.  Seems doubtful that they w= ill go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US.

>= > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.

&= gt;I think what Gert was trying to say is that in places that matter tunnel= s are gone.  The vast majority of the IPv6 core connectivity should ru= n without any tunnels involved these days.  What happens at the edge i= s, as you point out, a >different story but numbers show a static increa= se in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost assume the it=E2=80=99s= =E2=80=9Cgeeks waiting patiently prodding people every other week=E2=80=9D= and =E2=80=9Cpeople who really need it but had no other choice
>on short notice=E2=80=9D who are on tunnels, a= nd that=E2=80=99s it.

We will ignore the "edge" at our peril. 

BTW, I happen to be an IPv6 bigot and pro= d all end user corporations who will listen (and many who would prefer not = to!) to start the IPv6 conversion.  (And have done so for the last 5 y= ears.)  My cries have often fallen on deaf ears.


Bjoern
=
=E2=80=94
Bjoern A. Zeeb            &= nbsp;               ????????? ??? ?????= ?? ??????:
'??? ??? ???? ??????  ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? = ????? ????? ????
?????? ?? ????? ????',  ????????? ?????????, "??? = ????? ?? ?????", ?.???



---153701192-1188484595-1396277061=:74347-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:47:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 996ED1A066B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:47:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dqrEHd--IXAs for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:47:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm11-vm9.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm11-vm9.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 160931A0849 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:47:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.159] by nm11.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:47:23 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.150] by tm5.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:47:23 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1026.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:47:23 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 763321.87955.bm@omp1026.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 83781 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 14:47:23 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396277243; bh=szHpA9R+pgvWyM8QkdeUXgwb0L94sBADKMMVQsAT7po=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=JwRS8FwzlqE5uiLFcwSFvrEY8BQEfTrnKGT/ntkHzI3XpAKvVddcYXGb1Fd2JvaJoUWdyoEVRT1ZitttbkwCKwegcFtq3WuPpaorEGr8j9KLGQIq+drd8i1BHPtEjgS9lSLjJuwMaXNKWVOEar44RjpAvfUyR4teirmE6ruulbg= X-YMail-OSG: zmwVP5MVM1kN0iCdFmyPWvFWOjgJGCMQHFIEqCUAKTFVY9p eX4Za8r1JvaUqIi_1MYiQP2tIY6u_E6horpidZ2WPkHWjzQQtlqtWPoosCcV eScCNImjn3aY2dnh5H8YB8ExZtpAKal0wQ_GEAntamBNEjbCwLrRlR1Nl1kT EpvXQtmCuFBSVC_HfubPamDGrBY02eziIxfnUjGkSvp_Faet6VrdSUELqh5q DU8GNRvAyHprFklyOoKnog_C4rC9E_Rq9UkwCVdEGJwg7UUj1cJPx78lqUl3 fVjy79nf4IRpb4CRY2FLohNg6qMpSrxu24KkPULfNHXYyzOAOMe84kK5a4JL Ryx0qnqynPin.03BtLIfiarKUoflk2.11Tms67fWuZAhC4HPMBnbh_usOwf. oPagMoeAWahkyCPHGupD6DxyFY.Av.oHQWN_pPo9v7.dwFgS4ykO._Z23THk u_aZ_NpIA6qo14fatMjTHfn2USJRIu_fh1.oIAXOg8ZEBdUM9GcTfuvBBNhT xpBLw.pWoYDkLUIHeLBLP2XaG4Zr3IiZO3UwSVQ1BXtkhADSfmElvIWghC3p 5JKR5hGgjcrzsoJxCdUz9RY1Qnh0R06utCx6ZNfK9wE1MdarQWNR44yqzSd8 NZ9za Received: from [50.143.174.186] by web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:47:22 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, Ii4uLmluIHBsYWNlcyB0aGF0IG1hdHRlciB0dW5uZWxzIGFyZSBnb25lLiIKClBlcmhhcHMgeW91IGNvdWxkIHNoYXJlIHdoYXQsIGV4YWN0bHksIHlvdSBjb25zaWRlciAicGxhY2VzIHRoYXQgbWF0dGVyLiLCoCBJcyBpdCBzaW1wbHkgdGhhdCBwbGFjZXMgd2hpY2ggb2ZmZXIgSVB2NiBlbmQtdG8tZW5kIGFyZSB0aGUgb25seSBwbGFjZXMgdGhhdCBtYXR0ZXI_CgpKdXN0IGZvciB0aGUgZWRpZmljYXRpb24gb2YgdGhvc2Ugb2YgdXMgbGl2aW5nIGluIHBsYWNlcyB3aGljaCwgYXBwYXJlbnRseSwgZG8gbm8BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> Message-ID: <1396277242.15010.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:47:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Jouris To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , Nalini Elkins In-Reply-To: <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-1551098171-838996614-1396277242=:15010" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/8CFXoqg3PPcHM5L2S2XVkf87_7I Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Bill Jouris List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:29 -0000 ---1551098171-838996614-1396277242=:15010 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "...in places that matter tunnels are gone."=0A=0APerhaps you could share w= hat, exactly, you consider "places that matter."=C2=A0 Is it simply that pl= aces which offer IPv6 end-to-end are the only places that matter?=0A=0AJust= for the edification of those of us living in places which, apparently, do = not matter....=0A=0A=0A=C2=A0=0ABill Jouris=0AInside Products, Inc.=0Awww.i= nsidethestack.com=0A831-659-8360=0A925-855-9512 (direct)=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A____= ____________________________=0A From: Bjoern A. Zeeb =0ATo: Nalini Elkins =0ACc: IP= v6 Operations =0ASent: Monday, March 31, 2014 7:27 AM=0ASu= bject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment=0A =0A=0A=0AOn 31 Mar 2014, at 14= :08 , Nalini Elkins wrote:=0A=0A> =0A> = =0A> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:=0A>> W= hat if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration=0A>= > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6= =0A>> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling ove= rhead=0A>> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.=0A> =0A>>= The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.=0A=0AMaybe till= 2002/2003.=C2=A0 I still remember a lot of tunnelling from back then.=C2= =A0 Certainly there was enough connectivity around that one didn=E2=80=99t = need it anymore in a well connected place.=0A=0A=0A> You have got to be kid= ding.=C2=A0 Most large enterprises are just starting to learn to spell IPv= 6.=C2=A0 I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their 5-year plan ye= t.=C2=A0 And these are MAJOR US corporations.=0A=0AUntil one of their major= suppliers in Asia says =E2=80=9Cand by tomorrow please do all this over IP= v6=E2=80=9D.=C2=A0 I am still waiting for a publicly known case of this.=C2= =A0 Certainly no one will switch over night but no IPv6 at all in the next = five years for a major company is not realistic anymore.=C2=A0 There will b= e surprises.=0A=0A=0A> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectiv= ity from my ISP or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money.=C2=A0 Whe= n our engineers do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6=C2=A0 = tunnelling.=0A=0AI think there are two types of ISPs left without IPv6;=C2= =A0 the ones that just won=E2=80=99t do it, and the ones that would love to= give it to you but just cannot until they are confident with their deploym= ent working edge-to-edge.=C2=A0 The number of the latter seems to increase,= the number of the former might cease to exist in one way or the other in a= couple of years.=0A=0A=0A> Just trying to inject a little reality into the= conversation.=0A=0AI think what Gert was trying to say is that in places t= hat matter tunnels are gone.=C2=A0 The vast majority of the IPv6 core conne= ctivity should run without any tunnels involved these days.=C2=A0 What happ= ens at the edge is, as you point out, a different story but numbers show a = static increase in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost assume the= it=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cgeeks waiting patiently prodding people every other = week=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cpeople who really need it but had no other choic= e on short notice=E2=80=9D who are on tunnels, and that=E2=80=99s it.=0A=0A= =0ABjoern=0A=0A=E2=80=94 =0ABjoern A. Zeeb=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ???????= ?? ??? ??????? ??????:=0A'??? ??? ???? ??????=C2=A0 ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ?= ?????? ??? ????? ????? ????=0A?????? ?? ????? ????',=C2=A0 ????????? ??????= ???, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.???=0A=0A_____________________________________= __________=0Av6ops mailing list=0Av6ops@ietf.org=0Ahttps://www.ietf.org/mai= lman/listinfo/v6ops ---1551098171-838996614-1396277242=:15010 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"...in places that matter tunnel= s are gone."

Perhaps you could share what, exactly, you consider "pl= aces that matter."  Is it simply that places which offer IPv6 end-to-e= nd are the only places that matter?

Just for the edification of thos= e of us living in places which, apparently, do not matter....

 
Bill Jouris=
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831= -659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)


<= div dir=3D"ltr">
From: Bjoern A. Zeeb <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net>
To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>= ;
Cc: IPv6 Operations = <v6ops@ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment

=0A
On 31 Mar 2014, at 14:08 , N= alini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.= com> wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08= :31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:
>> What if we first think ab= out QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration
>> towards IPv6 wo= uld require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6
>> compl= etely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead
&g= t;> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.
>
&= gt;> The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.

M= aybe till 2002/2003.  I still remember a lot of tunnelling from back t= hen.  Certainly there was enough connectivity around that one didn=E2= =80=99t need it anymore in a well connected place.


> You have= got to be kidding.  Most large enterprises are just starting to learn to spell IPv6.  I talk to quit= e few who say it is not even in their 5-year plan yet.  And these are = MAJOR US corporations.

Until one of their major suppliers in Asia sa= ys =E2=80=9Cand by tomorrow please do all this over IPv6=E2=80=9D.  I = am still waiting for a publicly known case of this.  Certainly no one = will switch over night but no IPv6 at all in the next five years for a majo= r company is not realistic anymore.  There will be surprises.

<= br>> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP= or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money.  When our engineers= do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6  tunnelling.
=
I think there are two types of ISPs left without IPv6;  the ones t= hat just won=E2=80=99t do it, and the ones that would love to give it to yo= u but just cannot until they are confident with their deployment working edge-to-edge.  The number of the latter seems to increase, the number= of the former might cease to exist in one way or the other in a couple of = years.


> Just trying to inject a little reality into the conv= ersation.

I think what Gert was trying to say is that in places that= matter tunnels are gone.  The vast majority of the IPv6 core connecti= vity should run without any tunnels involved these days.  What happens= at the edge is, as you point out, a different story but numbers show a sta= tic increase in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost assume the it= =E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cgeeks waiting patiently prodding people every other wee= k=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9Cpeople who really need it but had no other choice o= n short notice=E2=80=9D who are on tunnels, and that=E2=80=99s it.

<= br>Bjoern

=E2=80=94
Bjoern A. Zeeb        &n= bsp;                   ??????= ??? ??? ??????? ??????:
'??? ??? ???? ??????  ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ????
??= ???? ?? ????? ????',  ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.???=

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing li= st
v= 6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

=
---1551098171-838996614-1396277242=:15010-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:48:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CF01A6EDB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:48:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.561 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c8Om-UbRT0Bu for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A95D1A0849 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id 60F03A2; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:48:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5EB9C; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:48:25 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:48:25 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Nalini Elkins In-Reply-To: <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-137064504-1903857618-1396277305=:747" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/gpxBi79P6QDeiKdfw34Fpz0Rj3Q Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:48:31 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---137064504-1903857618-1396277305=:747 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Nalini Elkins wrote: > The ISP to my home is Comcast.  Just saying.  Seems doubtful that they > will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US. Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/ As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the world. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se ---137064504-1903857618-1396277305=:747-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:50:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616CD1A6EEA for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:50:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zTdG5Btfvfsu for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:50:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a0i308.smtpcorp.com (a0i308.smtpcorp.com [216.22.15.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDC911A6EDB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:50:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=smtpcorp.com; s=a0_1; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=0MaK8VzCO2kiNK43vzzkKmkmwfBgUBLQeRYb57wRkDY=; b=N4RiF7uu/+5i7nITvoHcFuG5b0glllYZlXZw24hqYSUBxdG+00CSLHcHgwoX/L+qj7/BRWCYyEsdA6xOu+itBNnsTXjEjCXmjh35REukcWqwMzoWqhLvP8ZYaYDCQ2KNs9JrXWt1VAnVMaNUOJKSPdPy/0yysEC1Q4F0ZUZpHkI=; From: Daniel Corbe To: Nalini Elkins References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:50:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> (Nalini Elkins's message of "Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:44:21 -0700 (PDT)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Smtpcorp-Track: 454033847.1.57195920 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/P7B5LY9n6OeJ_5lVxQHANmQI_uQ Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:50:07 -0000 Nalini Elkins writes: > The ISP to my home is Comcast. Just saying. Seems doubtful that they will go under since they > seem to have a near monopoly in the US. But Comcast will give you IPv6 if you ask them nicely. From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:55:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EFF31A6EDB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:55:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GvxMo6WR-W_9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EEF01A0833 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.134] ([172.56.39.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s2VEtBkG042042 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:14 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <533981C9.2030307@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:55:05 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:28.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/28.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Jouris , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , Nalini Elkins References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277242.15010.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396277242.15010.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FxLdSo55CcjlvCAJ319M8H5UpCXIExcDP" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:15 +0000 (UTC) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/55ibr7yYEUcOKpdlD6_AIOAD8EA Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:21 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --FxLdSo55CcjlvCAJ319M8H5UpCXIExcDP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/31/14, 7:47 AM, Bill Jouris wrote: > "...in places that matter tunnels are gone." >=20 > Perhaps you could share what, exactly, you consider "places that > matter." Is it simply that places which offer IPv6 end-to-end are > the only places that matter? He means that you don't need to hop over a transit provider to build out ipv6 connectivity anymore. The networks that enterprises an operators need to connect to on the big I internet are and have been engaged in IPv6 deployment in their networks and to their commercial customers for some time. > Just for the edification of those of us living in places which, > apparently, do not matter.... >=20 >=20 > Bill Jouris Inside Products, Inc. www.insidethestack.com=20 > 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > ________________________________ From: Bjoern A. Zeeb > To: Nalini Elkins > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 7:27 AM Subject: Re: > [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 31 Mar 2014, at 14:08 , Nalini Elkins > wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: >>> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because >>> migration towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable >>> period, until IPv6 completely takes over from IPv4. During that >>> time, IPv6 tunneling overhead would affect the overall efficiency >>> and data delivery. >>=20 >>> The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. >=20 > Maybe till 2002/2003. I still remember a lot of tunnelling from back > then. Certainly there was enough connectivity around that one didn=92t= > need it anymore in a well connected place. >=20 >=20 >> You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just >> starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is >> not even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US >> corporations. >=20 > Until one of their major suppliers in Asia says =93and by tomorrow > please do all this over IPv6=94. I am still waiting for a publicly > known case of this. Certainly no one will switch over night but no > IPv6 at all in the next five years for a major company is not > realistic anymore. There will be surprises. >=20 >=20 >> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP >> or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money. When our >> engineers do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 >> tunnelling. >=20 > I think there are two types of ISPs left without IPv6; the ones that > just won=92t do it, and the ones that would love to give it to you but > just cannot until they are confident with their deployment working > edge-to-edge. The number of the latter seems to increase, the number > of the former might cease to exist in one way or the other in a > couple of years. >=20 >=20 >> Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. >=20 > I think what Gert was trying to say is that in places that matter > tunnels are gone. The vast majority of the IPv6 core connectivity > should run without any tunnels involved these days. What happens at > the edge is, as you point out, a different story but numbers show a > static increase in end-user IPv6 connectivity and I would almost > assume the it=92s =93geeks waiting patiently prodding people every othe= r > week=94 and =93people who really need it but had no other choice on sho= rt > notice=94 who are on tunnels, and that=92s it. >=20 >=20 > Bjoern >=20 > =97 Bjoern A. Zeeb ????????? ??? ??????? > ??????: '??? ??? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? > ????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????', ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? > ?????", ?.??? >=20 > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list=20 > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list=20 > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 --FxLdSo55CcjlvCAJ319M8H5UpCXIExcDP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlM5gckACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrIxnwCfdz5Nd4Buj+rDubH9J22h0R6r nKoAnRwwON6aOoLJdnZhsDnngwNruUFk =keoC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FxLdSo55CcjlvCAJ319M8H5UpCXIExcDP-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 07:59:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C25471A07F5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:59:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ur_hXOXolsRx for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm5-vm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm5-vm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.123]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400041A6EDB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.175] by nm5.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:59:09 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.244] by tm11.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:59:09 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1015.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 14:59:09 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 164628.77526.bm@omp1015.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 48615 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 14:59:08 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396277948; bh=+hfrgzm9Trrxqbmfp6CZFh5IH/IBha7H1EvHpJYW3sE=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RGKPQtv1tHwoQCYMU81qsqvi8IANBpSyArIN6nDMmdNWbUFuq0o75ZoL5Pcos4i9OujlGVSZKS722RCyRyPGHYmn+HEZFu5M+iJtVvVU5IBzJUzu0WSoCz6Cs9VKWNjJSzc0rQAZgQueg2YoOoHau/7gjWKirr3gfGBdyPGJRBI= X-YMail-OSG: MtizX54VM1lPvZTvTOzFPtXKhMM0iINyDeSUTekQs8QHreb TwLGo4RIdVknBxG4.JufbNs92x5jrBYviEco3pHYpoYg_1.LPhsTDBe8Q2Im tIsAtLnqt_.KqQdGlGC88A7w3V4wRVlmTMF0lKqlrhgjlxqiPOtXjICH_oRr n0Bqnav19_51IyXf2__GBnMXMHqvVx6.Tqw08DblhC8iFSQ9xskbzWmDiLZK 3q3njUGJRFgyIgN3_zKzZvju8jWN17kg92UdQHBWPbpH7.1tSdvJc2dHK9.b K8JW1VTJVWucrHSTQjo.VsJpiLgR9RRAfrPq8EwJpSgJ3pP1EbiuFBGSdvIx 7A.yQlXKYwzOxc5Npwdl9DnCwI6rwuLkvL8eplHtsJlS44y4eWC.CBz9b343 KdglTccUSqGH7E0KaxAZrzHnjwlTpbwtnEYTaehOW_A7CLo7drklS6uC4BSM WE6ZDwWasbRfI_v1lEDlpaghC1qTDvG8X0FyvhKEIb.5jvaKsi1SGdbdAta4 P7HAJkA0Q2mAdQp2yGTd9M98OwgweXxheJRJyUY1gqhcPA7BHQOcZLtClEtd pDli9e.Sb94z5BGX1rWDYYQClPG3vnJhRvJpvGzQ6aGnE2g-- Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:59:08 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, Cgo.PiBUaGUgSVNQIHRvIG15IGhvbWUgaXMgQ29tY2FzdC4gwqBKdXN0IHNheWluZy4gwqBTZWVtcyBkb3VidGZ1bCB0aGF0IHRoZXkgd2lsbCBnbyB1bmRlciBzaW5jZSB0aGV5IHNlZW0gdG8gaGF2ZSBhIG5lYXIgbW9ub3BvbHkgaW4gdGhlIFVTLgoKPkNvbWNhc3QgaXMgZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBvbiBhIHdpZGUgc2NhbGUuIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0LwoKPkFzIGZhciBhcyBJIGNhbiB0ZWxsLCB0aGV5IG5vdyBoYXZlIHRoZSBsYXJnZXN0IElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudCBpbiB0aGUgd29ybGQuCgoBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 07:59:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: Mikael Abrahamsson In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-153701192-431648398-1396277948=:18387" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/b0YcESvJfz7vlKpXqmzkdld6tUQ Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:59:14 -0000 ---153701192-431648398-1396277948=:18387 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =0A=0A>> The ISP to my home is Comcast. =A0Just saying. =A0Seems doubtful t= hat they will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US.= =0A=0A>Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/=0A= =0A>As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the = world.=0A=0AGuys,=A0=0A=0AComcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depe= nd on how close you are to a major urban center. =A0 I have asked before an= d was told that it was not available in my area. =A0BTW, =A0I =A0do not liv= e COMPLETELY in the middle of nowhere. =A0 Just where you can actually be s= urrounded by trees and clean air.=0A=0AThe local office opens at 9:00am my = time. =A0(about an hour). =A0I will ask again (nicely!) and post the result= s of what I get. =A0I hope to stand corrected. =A0=A0=0A=0ANalini ---153701192-431648398-1396277948=:18387 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>> The ISP to my home is Comcast.  = Just saying.  Seems doubtful that they will go under since they seem t= o have a near monopoly in the US.

>Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wid= e scale. http://www.comcast6.net/

>As far as I can tell, they now= have the largest IPv6 deployment in the world.

Guys, 

Comcast is = indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you are to a major ur= ban center.   I have asked before and was told that it was not availab= le in my area.  BTW,  I  do not live COMPLETELY in the middle of now= here.   Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees and clean a= ir.

The local office opens at 9:00am my time.  (about an hour). &nbs= p;I will ask again (nicely!) and post the results of what I get.  I ho= pe to stand corrected.   
Nalini

 
---153701192-431648398-1396277948=:18387-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:03:10 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 547E21A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.561 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QKOancfO_wdA for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from uplift.swm.pp.se (ipv6.swm.pp.se [IPv6:2a00:801::f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C96C1A066B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix, from userid 501) id DB7BAA2; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:03:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by uplift.swm.pp.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51C69C; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:03:01 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:03:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Mikael Abrahamsson To: Nalini Elkins In-Reply-To: <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) Organization: People's Front Against WWW MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-137064504-1223404749-1396278181=:747" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/eiAL0P4vbiwsTmZi5_yoJhcqcsU Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:08 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. ---137064504-1223404749-1396278181=:747 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Nalini Elkins wrote: > Comcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you are > to a major urban center.   I have asked before and was told that it was > not available in my area.  BTW,  I  do not live COMPLETELY in the middle > of nowhere.   Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees and > clean air. > > The local office opens at 9:00am my time.  (about an hour).  I will ask again (nicely!) and post the results of what I get.  I hope to stand corrected.    When listening to Comcast staff presentations on this issue, it didn't seem like something you need to ask for and they turn it on only for you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're done with your area. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se ---137064504-1223404749-1396278181=:747-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:03:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 435131A0A24 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kQaCKAh5VIpW for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0DCD1A6EF0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.134] ([172.56.39.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s2VF3Lol042113 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:22 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <533983B4.2040607@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:28.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/28.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nalini Elkins , Gert Doering , Mohammad Aazam References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="FhPhqfO91bVoArDb7tJumitRfbSumjLxC" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:23 +0000 (UTC) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/TqfAaU1GsqmC7YVdLzfbZeQavE4 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:29 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --FhPhqfO91bVoArDb7tJumitRfbSumjLxC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/31/14, 7:08 AM, Nalini Elkins wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: >> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because >> migration towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable >> period, until IPv6 completely takes over from IPv4. During that >> time, IPv6 tunneling overhead would affect the overall efficiency >> and data delivery. >=20 >> The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. >=20 > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just > starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is > not even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US > corporations. >=20 > At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP > or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money. When our engineers > do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 tunneling. If you stick a verizon 4g dongle in your laptop you will get IPv6 connectivity anywhere there is coverage in the united states. It's been deployed that way since the LTE network went into production (2010). > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. >=20 > Thanks, >=20 > Nalini Elkins Inside Products, Inc. (831) 659-8360=20 > www.insidethestack.com >=20 > _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list=20 > v6ops@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 --FhPhqfO91bVoArDb7tJumitRfbSumjLxC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlM5g7QACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrJ6CACeJNNjndOjXPAGjiKjFgLW1vMD w5cAn39cfn8RGuJaML2SFxXUmtyIY+ck =eEww -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --FhPhqfO91bVoArDb7tJumitRfbSumjLxC-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:10:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 253D21A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:10:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M4D1Fy2Bc0pj for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:10:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD881A0833 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.134] ([172.56.39.52]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s2VFAL0Z042151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:10:25 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com) Message-ID: <53398558.8070503@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:10:16 -0700 From: joel jaeggli User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:28.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/28.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mikael Abrahamsson , Nalini Elkins References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jTgAjFrbXMIjFNh3Dd5IrAuQQE0bgNAgS" X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:10:25 +0000 (UTC) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/p-J8km48NBEqOUg370qO9rAE01s Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:10:34 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --jTgAjFrbXMIjFNh3Dd5IrAuQQE0bgNAgS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/31/14, 8:03 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Nalini Elkins wrote: >=20 > When listening to Comcast staff presentations on this issue, it didn't > seem like something you need to ask for and they turn it on only for > you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're done with your area. you will need a docsis 3.0 modem... but you need that for more than 40 down anyway. >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 --jTgAjFrbXMIjFNh3Dd5IrAuQQE0bgNAgS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlM5hVgACgkQ8AA1q7Z/VrKtSwCeIqZO7XlQdMmzP6p96PnF4cEW 3LsAniPhMY+t5g21T9W+/t/ds7ABGimb =IwTr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jTgAjFrbXMIjFNh3Dd5IrAuQQE0bgNAgS-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:13:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1E31A6F26 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:13:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r70fNXAsctHU for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:13:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm7-vm4.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm7-vm4.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.95]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C959D1A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:12:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.171] by nm7.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:12:49 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.161] by tm7.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:12:49 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1027.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:12:49 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 580236.11569.bm@omp1027.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 81027 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 15:12:49 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396278769; bh=ZCNhbNPISiyCJ2vCLTzv+wVPpbuv4dgN1iUv/NrrinA=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=On2YjKpE+iGeM0UIeAjbxcas/OEj/boKWRL08wNPYSdzV79Bs9EwU7B8U5kVstvOB8rG3ma6CnUhs2N4SL+RFYl2FtYOXgn3dAVx8uuXMzoEcGb7k+iodOowDgkIZ3x7jSi3tQFsjA8/EfQTmflTYI3MRxOQGkGtL7d1G5zz4+A= X-YMail-OSG: rdF2jwEVM1nWv.lFoqC2bAT1hMfbXlI8QtGacS6Sx3tDouL lNQaHQDCYjQU4l.pBFWFZ450.2.15JJP9WiRSwrnZeT8DP.NjiBzaEs_8Guj JCtJ4JllkQVfZec0MX3x_SCsuJ4zzs4yUttYC6McsVZkRjb5wJB.frmHNZ_O Zel74EVQRlTr4Bv9IVIKajLjAr33mPKkqPa6WFUtgvW6KxAyXIsbE2trRyOh lwVlJ53hUAyTVVFtAlS4mr6vdfEPWTeue49n9S6X.9hH5PSovBH9vcKdg8kk jEg2dtVZXL6WtN79lU0k08pn7yd4F6L9JGuqJZji1uGgtpO0gr6jQM7yMGNk tZDHnl5gLs9qjEkb88X4neKQNWlR67ZdZ9sZZpFu.e2wXvX4Z_zYQLzJclR_ cmyxcHv6S5SUJdoGuYrFgNwv5L7rcESem5JAUb3ub6ud_qjhjS11uH2Mgu0F ef5WcODGu1N7LnjhR9OJVmuP20nkJ.gNOp55vF2KlxHq4rnKyiRrWwjD_rDP 9Ju_rei27ujszpcGjm30j9iXdyF0kAtE0bAShBUeQBw-- Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:12:48 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, wqAKCk9uIE1vbiwgMzEgTWFyIDIwMTQsIE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgd3JvdGU6Cgo.PiBDb21jYXN0IGlzIGluZGVlZCBkb2luZyBJUHY2IGJ1dCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBkZXBlbmQgb24gaG93IGNsb3NlIHlvdSBhcmUgdG8gYSBtYWpvciB1cmJhbiBjZW50ZXIuIMKgIEkgaGF2ZSBhc2tlZCBiZWZvcmUgYW5kIHdhcyB0b2xkIHRoYXQgaXQgd2FzIG5vdCBhdmFpbGFibGUgaW4gbXkgYXJlYS4gwqBCVFcsIMKgSSDCoGRvIG5vdCBsaXZlIENPTVBMRVRFTFkgaW4gdGhlIG1pZGRsZSBvZiBub3doZXJlLiDCoCBKdXMBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:12:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: Mikael Abrahamsson In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/nbk17BfHRJ8fbxgwH00kwBg373g Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:13:04 -0000 =A0=0A=0AOn Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Nalini Elkins wrote:=0A=0A>> Comcast is indee= d doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you are to a major urban c= enter. =A0 I have asked before and was told that it was not available in my= area. =A0BTW, =A0I =A0do not live COMPLETELY in the middle of nowhere. =A0= Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees and clean air.=0A>> =0A= >> The local office opens at 9:00am my time. =A0(about an hour). =A0I will = ask again (nicely!) and post the results of what I get. =A0I hope to stand = corrected. =A0=A0=0A=0A>When listening to Comcast staff presentations on th= is issue, it didn't seem like something you need to ask for and they turn i= t on only for you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're done with yo= ur area.=0A=0ASure. =A0That is indeed the question. =A0 They do some areas = before others (and rightfully so - they are in business and need to get the= majority of their customers who live in the urban centers. =A0Comcast is a= very well run business.)=0A=0AI am just saying that many of us, at least i= n the US, do not live in urban centers - by choice. =A0 BTW, it took us yea= rs to get high speed broadband as well. =A0Probably 5 years after the major= urban center in my area (San Jose / San Francisco) had it. =A0I have an ar= tist friend who lives in quite a rural area in the middle of the US and she= does not have high speed broadband yet.=0A=0AIMHO, there will be for a lon= g time issues along the lines of digital divide. =A0Those who have native I= Pv6 and those who do not.=0A=0AAnd, the issues will be those of the edge.= =A0=0A=0ANalini From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:14:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7EB01A066B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:14:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NSxrONSBY1G5 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm5-vm4.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm5-vm4.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.131]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A158A1A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.158] by nm5.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:14:07 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.139] by tm4.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:14:07 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1015.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:14:07 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 334793.99100.bm@omp1015.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 5492 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 15:14:06 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396278846; bh=yzROrXA/jvpYFfqfq9FhHWtY51hP1j9LAQgYlaram9Y=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=jQ8bNehGJyaPQX65Mc35t3FY1hBYaKHhoNxzjCF6F135HvsuSXH8eJOwMD28jzuyg4qTnIbR3LUOekDNFZVc46B6lO9yBR3b0geOCoy6sZxMcPSXGbPahr1r466WS9sCBx1qtDdWB6f2or30rgQ9LP25oHHlxgC0hPVReuPi3GM= X-YMail-OSG: AF9ZkxkVM1mBk8ZQoQ0tWOqBmIasLEoMHLqRsKZTbnqzNVX FGTZKTOrcBem1NdtN0jJaFq18WgVpxxmZXGiAFhrMadfm8momJkroVGaOCjz yHZKxo6fzrvYvCkfNOA9p9llbGgSl97zMQh6DzS5Z6oEQVTGD7RRPsfOwQvz U.cNhX8SlbmDx1sDYppRTITWH3JgcGltLkmQp7FWmyTt4gYxslYGhNLzfV0T H0low4liK6Ihg2I5UnkaBPlm5bZZymehdpffYq24BapDLiv46xh2peR1BmZW EUcc_sfK7POhJ6k7j7uRS7v_5xEF3hou47bT8RwtPizhOQYQaL2Qs76lMCsW T00Hmc7NviouE.dh.8mD0tWKYoGz9NfzGTd6bBmNftFAW2UO2QCvWoY_WqjY T14GOtBfocJDIljKnCoToa4ktEmabQGEeasSVlQxeGnNCZ6.pJsWuKG141F5 89KnT1Zuf.EWv4APFnXCAlb0xgXCsHcam2bZBpF8J0xC8a1yBV1qxf9qmGx9 Cc3AmXyxUjQhXyRWyMq5JuPUs71TZuD93VVj23E7GtgEWfbA- Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:14:06 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, Cgo.PiAKPj4gQXQgaG9tZSwgSSBjZXJ0YWlubHkgY2FuJ3QgZ2V0IElQdjYgbmF0aXZlIGNvbm5lY3Rpdml0eSBmcm9tIG15IElTUAo.PiBvciBBTlkgSVNQIHdpdGhvdXQgcGF5aW5nIGh1Z2UgYW1vdW50cyBvZiBtb25leS7CoCAgV2hlbiBvdXIgZW5naW5lZXJzCj4.IGRvIElQdjYgdGVzdGluZyBvdmVyIHRoZSBJbnRlcm5ldCB3ZSB1c2UgSVB2NCAvIElQdjbCoCB0dW5uZWxpbmcuCgo.SWYgeW91IHN0aWNrIGEgdmVyaXpvbiA0ZyBkb25nbGUgaW4geW91ciBsYXB0b3AgeW91IHdpbGwgZ2V0IElQdjYKPmMBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <533983B4.2040607@bogus.com> Message-ID: <1396278846.3603.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:14:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: joel jaeggli , Gert Doering , Mohammad Aazam In-Reply-To: <533983B4.2040607@bogus.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Vy1YmGDTKaQ-mNe4zxanu3rS27Y Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:14:18 -0000 =0A=0A>> =0A>> At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from= my ISP=0A>> or ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money.=A0 When our = engineers=0A>> do IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6=A0 tunn= eling.=0A=0A>If you stick a verizon 4g dongle in your laptop you will get I= Pv6=0A>connectivity anywhere there is coverage in the united states. It's b= een=0A>deployed that way since the LTE network went into production (2010).= =0A=0AThanks, Joel. =A0I will check with the local Verizon office.=0A=0ANal= ini From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:17:19 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28AEF1A6F21 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:17:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.189 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.189 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nw3jnzoibxgw for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:17:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.z120.zixworks.com (mx.z120.zixworks.com [199.30.235.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A5181A066B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:17:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) by Outbound.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id E0FDA10918E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:17:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva1.bcbsm.com (unknown [12.107.172.80]) by mx.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id 4FC92122324; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:17:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva1.bcbsm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA80 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7854F4F805D; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:00:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pwn401ea100.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (unknown [10.64.80.217]) by imsva1.bcbsm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683244F8055; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:00:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA105.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (10.64.102.241) by PWN401EA100.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (10.64.80.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.438.0; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:17:08 -0400 Received: from PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::fdcb:603d:469e:b1db]) by PWN401EA105.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::f13e:83e4:1dae:5345%10]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:17:07 -0400 From: "Ackermann, Michael" To: Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPRSXNBdbDDM5GBUyCYXCSZI+Y2ZrsFbiAgA69PICAAAkXgIAAh2kAgAAqsoCAAAVhAIAABKKA///BHtCAAATJQA== Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:17:07 +0000 Message-ID: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.10.35] x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.500.1017-20602.000 x-tm-as-result: No--48.134100-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201PWN401EA160entc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-VPM-MSG-ID: c55ed4f7-d8d9-491d-8858-0cd976456bca X-VPM-HOST: vmvpm01.z120.zixworks.com X-VPM-GROUP-ID: 304157eb-df48-43c5-98b3-3777ec9e97a2 X-VPM-ENC-REGIME: Plaintext X-VPM-CERT-FLAG: 0 X-VPM-IS-HYBRID: 0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/YZtFBug7b-3CfgwsjHyWlW6npaY Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:17:17 -0000 --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Same here in Michigan. I tried to get IPV6 on Comcast and it is not = available in the 3 areas I tried within the state of MI. From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Nalini Elkins Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 10:59 AM To: Mikael Abrahamsson Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment >> The ISP to my home is Comcast. Just saying. Seems doubtful that they = will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US. >Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/ >As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the = world. Guys, Comcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you are = to a major urban center. I have asked before and was told that it was = not available in my area. BTW, I do not live COMPLETELY in the middle = of nowhere. Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees and clean = air. The local office opens at 9:00am my time. (about an hour). I will ask = again (nicely=21) and post the results of what I get. I hope to stand = corrected. Nalini The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and = is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies. =20 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are = nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association. --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D--><=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D-->

Same here in Michigan.    I = tried to get IPV6 on Comcast and it is not available in the 3 areas I = tried within the state of MI.

 

 

 

From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Nalini Elkins
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 10:59 AM
To: Mikael Abrahamsson
Cc: IPv6 Operations
Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment

 

 

>> The ISP to my home is Comcast. =  Just saying.  Seems doubtful that they will go under since they = seem to have a near monopoly in the US.

>Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/

>As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the = world.

 

Guys, 

 

Comcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to = depend on how close you are to a major urban center.   I have asked = before and was told that it was not available in my area.  BTW, =  I  do not live COMPLETELY in the middle of nowhere.   Just where you can = actually be surrounded by trees and clean air.

 

The local office opens at 9:00am my time. =  (about an hour).  I will ask again (nicely=21) and post the = results of what I get.  I hope to stand corrected. =   

 

Nalini

 


The information contained in this communication is highly confidential = and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan = are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association.

--_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201PWN401EA160entc_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:19:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77EA41A6F01 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:19:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B430-2kGC5Gc for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E0B1A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C5CB460465 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:19:40 +0200 (CEST) X-SpaceNet-Relay: true Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99453602AA for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:19:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 46453 invoked by uid 1007); 31 Mar 2014 17:19:40 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:19:40 +0200 From: Gert Doering To: Mohammad Aazam Message-ID: <20140331151940.GO43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pn+rwBzYl6Cwy8P4" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-NCC-RegID: de.space User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/GQraUlYJFEmYbhNvWY9g2VTaweo Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:19:46 -0000 --pn+rwBzYl6Cwy8P4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:26:05PM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > If this is the case, then how incompatible traffic is routed through a > network? If I'm on IPv6, how my traffic would be routed through the core? > Since core is not yet completely on IPv6. Why not? Our core has been IPv6-enabled since about 2005 or so. Fully dual-stack v4+v6, not lame excuses. (For those that prefer excuses, you can use 6PE or 6VPE to do MPLS tunneling, which will be about good or bad as your IPv4-over-MPLS, and if you need QoS for that, you need it for IPv6 as well. If you have enough bandwidth, you do not need extra QoS for IPv6) Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --pn+rwBzYl6Cwy8P4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUBUzmHjN9WwGXkzn/FAQIPYA//SZJEeQtNnb9oBhVRXua7fgOggcFA1EQB dmlvj2xNtAFKuM5TRFvByIVhs4hS6Z0oN00UtCexUHmsw2x4eZZoF48JcSlh7mr5 H5ADQY81Jw/qmWYIWjZxZShDVmgepmxiRo4zHAxfTnYXv6QWSgWfc0Hmn5lMELqy +5ZLZV79Tdoh+d2CE85Az1uXRXpRLGN+KHUFLaWL5aSkK2uI3UJKHfPoQ1/5YKRX YWORCPgRdMb6gQprgDhYuMz8pda2BQr7Wh69QVNZO2QVuSULWr84/f/oXVGZwfZl GKRdE/iV5WBFgWzVONg6rXG+Cr6wjh1qGtL6xQpZulVZacRHJ4kZ8XlTIlyc+Axj i/6OJD+WdmL0C85OkmGMVT+APfXnr8VeGKVLwqt/ewlHbI1+KxmmJ0Cex80WFfvW Cvl/FINmUyO7zyoBzOgGcpzVJ6HFgDl9uVz81eyFELL5o+hnVPbGvq6tn4CjZXsW VbWlETeVGwmywB6p5yHaIbKHawpJMqHTA2KEyWNZ5wg1ILLiNJOVugL5uJmE4nUX IrxIYu8iyUw6siGZNy/C+ldDPW4/9Y1jD3UHzapF1XMHgR/ypwSCP32vFZPdEFR5 byTmjm4A9ndVBOOJ7ci/UqyaIBDy+m0rlfBFoNLg18ftvhPNCZMUyhJDHX79/j7v 1vXVdmwcm9o= =6G5l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pn+rwBzYl6Cwy8P4-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:21:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CB671A6F01 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:21:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i5vNevIVXcnr for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 149E31A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BF10602E6 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:21:06 +0200 (CEST) X-SpaceNet-Relay: true Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45EAD6012B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:21:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 47139 invoked by uid 1007); 31 Mar 2014 17:21:06 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:21:06 +0200 From: Gert Doering To: Nalini Elkins Message-ID: <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="tY8VgGAk1Jhm+xOZ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-NCC-RegID: de.space User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/nWBMjdQz7M1NvPd1KAm10NUHA6s Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:21:11 -0000 --tY8VgGAk1Jhm+xOZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overh= ead > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. >=20 > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. >=20 > You have got to be kidding. =A0 Most large enterprises are just starting = to learn to spell IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say it is not even in th= eir 5-year plan yet. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations. Yeah, the US. "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right? > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. I tend to forget... But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-) Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --tY8VgGAk1Jhm+xOZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUBUzmH4t9WwGXkzn/FAQIVTA//Y3uP/gAyO+HCmiBucxGPLwx4VyXUyArf wsW8jg7re6AnD9MauPtQuTdYcTF5yziXyvNvbk5i1cJ/pxOBBSi1FXBZECiO0KY9 j4+LeKOpTTl73clPHKnIbmist8L/ac0ymIJST1bZiQSwhUWS2yVsbm9sYZd8LJ8/ i66N/028NCivv/9t5jl3+Dz7fRTjqc+yMEPjzx4phjwsrjksaTqNBwnSzsmHy/RX TAmutCBsFVOQIzbKUO2YhuzJ1ugm8/nPz0noILJlZFhBeWVvHCgVFD5bxLd4JHxP wElVeZ2WdPvbjT4VfyX2TykLxo3ADy4lZaSbagd74e1enwT5+CCCkGaAvFMCMTA0 9W5YRSkOeHjPuLycDPzCrqALpne1W6HolOHkOZAb0yHU2NWFqXDbrw/4NT/rk6vZ 2T9IUxZEkfbT0wTDe0ROLXzxlZ06pZxNJ7qMKfSrNrfoEckSv7R6xGiAWth7zj/n tHKA4EwZfg/dM533KtxqC/rVsIOsSJryXL8TRUFDBdiF0p/VsOjwLKHcFt02EtAP tgiF+0E0C6JU7+U07cxkyaX+pxbDdWS/Q1CRNQYAvIryHuVu2rb7pGZ3P5tUJc7i nJCVt0MIbHiWPS9M7vHG3nVHzMPtQIBpOpfTJzWHyHReh7fYz9/Wz0ERdt8cdbaq aJqvzTpfU00= =blSe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --tY8VgGAk1Jhm+xOZ-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:24:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B881A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:24:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id duwA-BBCPac0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:24:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB801A6F22 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:23:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57BE960465 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:23:56 +0200 (CEST) X-SpaceNet-Relay: true Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26501602A8 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:23:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 47254 invoked by uid 1007); 31 Mar 2014 17:23:56 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:23:56 +0200 From: Gert Doering To: Nalini Elkins Message-ID: <20140331152356.GQ43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="f6biZSZlz4R3GAdr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-NCC-RegID: de.space User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/WSBm-gq7i1SuCjbtqOSVnAh9R_M Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:24:02 -0000 --f6biZSZlz4R3GAdr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:44:21AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: > The ISP to my home is Comcast. =A0Just saying. =A0Seems doubtful that the= y will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US. Comcast actually is one of the first really large ISPs in the world that went to IPv6... Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --f6biZSZlz4R3GAdr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUBUzmIi99WwGXkzn/FAQK87xAAi9fhjsSc1XHZyoRDfrT528vK0l4oCGuA QlHqfoIvK/JbVOlticz8GH/EratXtwFT9rJoAwK28pRrpLx78Fg0o4GtRg6pOcNW LStbq1t+qOcThbBn6UIEdAjnfq9N4mQ+TmyqdyJ9LwmbLMwTEanJtOWUh4FlW+iC x9TCwaJQEdVdUFxk47OEhVcJ1ySA6dv+owTpeKFtL1vYYkLazaaEqHRLmI2y0ucN b6VlAt6IIF3SmzjPHhWsYmB0x6ZSYXWKARM32V9hwkcxhtTQ4ldDwM2TwBfsL1wq 8z3hXDMCr8MPhgxKyzRXY0/LomDYozgMQHrRVNSELsyYAAf2TUfAcil6tkEul0M5 fNYM7TS0H9E7z71GoTQUn3FS+XWQwz4D0MyExiQ4BLLNxwzWYUOCGa8/A9/f5jLH Q/OaowxzoSsu/rkvt8yj4BW1nN57aFdfIsTOt1+JPHJigOuG4gM9PMJoFzgMRy4i dosD3p+PF3rZIS99kqi8XrwF7HDTfZz7IdsnrOCOMFbuWyynoKiRZe7rSQdogGKq Fz3JRGUDvRJVxv3e3R+C597vKhTAhcys5ynBFf3ytHI1VNqUovvHTKjOEVeTutlD Dp8reKUbmv0mBp/kzqLrXTzzFVOkfpIFn7AGc8R/aOxzdWEogqEsEpbO2Bm+rabW Sj/6pdRc8/M= =REKd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --f6biZSZlz4R3GAdr-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:25:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 183431A6F25 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:25:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.23 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pkU1Pv6r7w4l for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:25:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF7321A6F22 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:25:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2VFPD37003189; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:25:13 +0100 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s2VFPD37003189 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1396279513; bh=iN1hBkFRJCZeBby6U0izW6wK324=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=IFx/1SCYEbSAybNeDp5NrFSXbqRUlNgE4iVcVj3c3kTXI/K46yMiBKlh7Z4pHKNNL 7a5G1kQ9mv/R0KFEuqHqb/wFDHcNCzVJUYpWmFaTLy+ZOomYWRIBIaOe1kgUgcTc+c TAziobIla+YWvqoU9mlS26hTAzGHbnQLpG4o3zKk= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q2UGPD05460270105X ret-id none; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:25:13 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.109] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2VFNrAk002511 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:23:54 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_BA3A5B76-9493-43A7-9262-5788423E554F" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Tim Chown In-Reply-To: <1396277242.15010.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:23:53 +0100 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277242.15010.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <03ECEDC2-8931-4E02-9BEE-FB224EF19021@ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: Bill Jouris X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q2UGPC054602701000; tid=q2UGPD05460270105X; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0 X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s2VFPD37003189 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/AzKUxkWqFVyMb8D28RxhjotXpuI Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:25:21 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_BA3A5B76-9493-43A7-9262-5788423E554F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 31 Mar 2014, at 15:47, Bill Jouris = wrote: > "...in places that matter tunnels are gone." >=20 > Perhaps you could share what, exactly, you consider "places that = matter." Is it simply that places which offer IPv6 end-to-end are the = only places that matter? >=20 > Just for the edification of those of us living in places which, = apparently, do not matter.... Perhaps one view is that the addition of IPv6 connectivity/addresses for = most of the root name servers is a positive indication that IPv6 is = robustly deployed, and therefore likely to be native end-to-end, "where = it matters" ? Indeed the position in access networks is patchy at best, else we'd not = see Google at only 3-4% IPv6 access. In that light, tunnelbroker.net = and friends are very valuable. I suspect also that there might be more IPv4-in-Ipv6 tunnelling out = there than most would expect. Tim --Apple-Mail=_BA3A5B76-9493-43A7-9262-5788423E554F Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii On 31 = Mar 2014, at 15:47, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.= com> wrote:

"...in places that matter tunnels are gone."

Perhaps you = could share what, exactly, you consider "places that matter."  Is = it simply that places which offer IPv6 end-to-end are the only places = that matter?

Just for the edification of those of us living in = places which, apparently, do not = matter....

Perhaps one view = is that the addition of IPv6 connectivity/addresses for most of the root = name servers is a positive indication that IPv6 is robustly deployed, = and therefore likely to be native end-to-end, "where it matters" = ?

Indeed the position in access networks is = patchy at best, else we'd not see Google at only 3-4% IPv6 access. =  In that light, tunnelbroker.net and friends are = very valuable.

I suspect also that there might = be more IPv4-in-Ipv6 tunnelling out there than most would = expect.

Tim

= --Apple-Mail=_BA3A5B76-9493-43A7-9262-5788423E554F-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:26:21 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D573A1A6EDC for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:26:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.23 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.23 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ky6eE-h50ary for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [IPv6:2001:630:d0:f102::25e]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AEA71A0A6F for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2VFQDoi003434; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:26:14 +0100 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.2 falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk s2VFQDoi003434 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=ecs.soton.ac.uk; s=201304; t=1396279574; bh=VzsNVNRGL7Y34yWX/P+MsUssm1I=; h=Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=pxUck7yEJ+Bg9etdD2aXPDG5bgzgZlCe6+lG7XGuP+0+8yuW7Ocfp7X4KIZ2gLJnu T3SMzL8JFElsG+0iu06VPTvNtI0a7Nsuv0yZJfEcF8Y+D1Xj1k/5Ze4J96BHsiz/uH CYDE46xfT8kOgJ8KNy6j9LJbUWfMccRLHa07+HJ0= Received: from gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk ([2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:401]) by falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk (falcon.ecs.soton.ac.uk [2001:630:d0:f102:250:56ff:fea0:68da]) envelope-from with ESMTP (valid=N/A) id q2UGQD05460270214r ret-id none; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:26:14 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.109] (host213-123-213-183.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.213.183]) (authenticated bits=0) by gander.ecs.soton.ac.uk (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s2VFQ7s8003329 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:26:07 +0100 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1DBDCCE7-674D-4662-8C66-E4DE551ECB25" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Tim Chown In-Reply-To: <20140331152356.GQ43641@Space.Net> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:26:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152356.GQ43641@Space.Net> <87B2D72E-384F-4C85-950C-5A43B5A962A7@ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: Gert Doering X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean, Found to be clean X-smtpf-Report: sid=q2UGQD054602702100; tid=q2UGQD05460270214r; client=relay,forged,no_ptr,ipv6; mail=; rcpt=; nrcpt=4:0; fails=0 X-ECS-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ECS-MailScanner-ID: s2VFQDoi003434 X-ECS-MailScanner-From: tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_HmAmiN1sr40qpNWJ4TBRQx0uuo Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:26:20 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_1DBDCCE7-674D-4662-8C66-E4DE551ECB25 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 For a pretty recent and very positive update on Comcast on IPv6, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DrWuvAOdsztk Tim On 31 Mar 2014, at 16:23, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:44:21AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: >> The ISP to my home is Comcast. Just saying. Seems doubtful that = they will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US. >=20 > Comcast actually is one of the first really large ISPs in the world = that > went to IPv6... >=20 > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > --=20 > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. = Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --Apple-Mail=_1DBDCCE7-674D-4662-8C66-E4DE551ECB25 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 For a = pretty recent and very positive update on Comcast on IPv6, = see:


Tim

On 31 Mar 2014, at 16:23, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:44:21AM -0700, = Nalini Elkins wrote:
The ISP to my home is = Comcast.  Just saying.  Seems doubtful that they will go under = since they seem to have a near monopoly in the = US.

Comcast actually is one of the first really = large ISPs in the world that
went to IPv6...

Gert Doering
=        -- NetMaster
--
have = you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG =             &n= bsp;          Vorstand: = Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 =          Aufsichtsratsvors.: = A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen =             &n= bsp;     HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 = (0)89/32356-444 =           USt-IdNr.: = DE813185279
_______________________________________________
v6ops = mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops

= --Apple-Mail=_1DBDCCE7-674D-4662-8C66-E4DE551ECB25-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:31:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91C11A0A6F for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id odAluVuhv7gY for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm9-vm10.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm9-vm10.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A3441A0549 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.156] by nm9.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:31:13 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.130] by tm2.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:31:13 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1006.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 15:31:13 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 201996.80133.bm@omp1006.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 93703 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 15:31:12 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396279872; bh=NmGRBJmi2JfucnXCWIDcBu8QXge2RN/h6Ro/Bvxc190=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=097etaqQ1DLxSuEvpe3F1Tt/BlGA4ER28wzpR29gqQQ9u3FlDLTPSq/S0gVAV4byPz1CA5IeH8sPjelfv9Hy4GstnCxEva9JsOG8l9YV5RgXVo9AmeYzI7CYyoZdmg2ZwxqV7iL3kojLruoT9+fqBq4Sx+3e2xvAg3a4fluVaHY= X-YMail-OSG: oVI8QvwVM1k4PLIFwv.4LOY.CExgDfqA.2o8yAQDfGBUIfC stk_9Bw0OuJJAfSnZ4rjqHE1.WPRqXdigIaLBitR3oRTUF4lms0.X_8D20eo .XNGHvp3Vu0YwEnpqxwLuFmvQy0pt6ilhRcOGmN3n6mA2VNJYo27lZHsUXFM oTpeCeh.d1aejf.9qMKVJsNn.yxJ88PAC9RaK8NjZUlgi5.r8_685RzbxPOG yLOX2I8RTlK4reMjsYDual1R1JQclv2xAPaql.lAEjjxmdNQPuZkDNTYW8xW t9n3Wrhd.5uUqUy.mkeQVXBw.huH3P4evA9raq0YuM9O2fVGwXaeINl1wOhe BzkYIjLJc4qy4RSzcJmYJULj8pzdpMzdJ3wR7jhF5kVbtKM1ifB48d8MDXKU cH3BTbNsDwPMRZifZKjWjaAzNLRZCOBOiW2stuuh6X4ljyrlW6mH7RA8RCVD t.PCffZmYWO0v.1_T3sudpqSZgJoFRI0SzmcPToJDfq1f1XgoSGzaTkLhhgw pDy5zQoXEpOHpMIwfxJl2hjmbVHge_.YU0blE7qlxRzg9gKGjVc6o0bWrbV9 6nwFQx.BpJnJMpOw3mz_VpOa4548nz.lLtsdkKhENG66FgRwPBZoO60I5How - Received: from [50.143.174.186] by web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:12 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, Ii4uLmp1c3Qgc3Vic2NyaWJlIHRvIHZlcml6b24gTFRFLCBnZXQgbmF0aXZlIElQdjYiCgpGaW5lLCBhcyBmYXIgYXMgaXQgZ29lcy7CoCBUaGVyZSBpcywgaG93ZXZlciwgYSBsaXR0bGUgcHJvYmxlbSB3aXRoIGJhbmR3aWR0aCB1c2luZyB3aXJlbGVzcyB2cyB3aXJlZC7CoCBTbyB3aGlsZSB3aXJlbGVzcyBtYXkgYmUgZ3JlYXQgZm9yIHRyeWluZyBvdXQgSVB2NiwgdGhhdCBzdGlsbCBsZWF2ZXMgc29tZSBpc3N1ZXMgdG8gYmUgYWRkcmVzc2VkIGJ5IHRob3NlIHRyeWluZyB0byBnZXQgcmVhbCB3b3JrIGQBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> Message-ID: <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:31:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Jouris To: Gert Doering In-Reply-To: <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="36908767-385788044-1396279872=:93301" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/pXLGwv2DLC9yugrfRpQb0T9bg64 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Bill Jouris List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:31:19 -0000 --36908767-385788044-1396279872=:93301 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6"=0A=0AFine, as far as it= goes.=A0 There is, however, a little problem with bandwidth using wireless= vs wired.=A0 So while wireless may be great for trying out IPv6, that stil= l leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to get real work done.= =0A=0A=A0=0ABill Jouris=0AInside Products, Inc.=0Awww.insidethestack.com=0A= 831-659-8360=0A925-855-9512 (direct)=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________= ________=0A From: Gert Doering =0ATo: Nalini Elkins =0ACc: IPv6 Operations =0ASent= : Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM=0ASubject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deploym= ent=0A =0A=0AHi,=0A=0AOn Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elki= ns wrote:=0A> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrot= e:=0A> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because mig= ration=0A> > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6=0A> > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tu= nneling overhead=0A> > would affect the overall efficiency and data deliver= y.=0A> =0A> >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.=0A>= =0A> You have got to be kidding. =A0 Most large enterprises are just start= ing to learn to spell IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say it is not even i= n their 5-year plan yet. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations.=0A=0AYeah,= the US.=A0 "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?=0A=0A> Just trying = to inject a little reality into the conversation.=0A=0AI tend to forget...= =0A=0ABut then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks= =0Ago - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-)=0A=0AGert Doerin= g=0A=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- NetMaster=0A-- =0Ahave you enabled IPv6 on something= today...?=0A=0ASpaceNet AG=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard=0AJoseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann=0AD-80807 Muenchen=A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)=0ATel: +49 (0)89/32356-4= 44=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279=0A=0A________________________= _______________________=0Av6ops mailing list=0Av6ops@ietf.org=0Ahttps://www= .ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --36908767-385788044-1396279872=:93301 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"...just subsc= ribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6"

Fine, as far as it goe= s.  There is, however, a little problem with bandwidth using wireless = vs wired.  So while wireless may be great for trying out IPv6, that st= ill leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to get real work don= e.
 
Bill Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8= 360
925-855-9512 (direct)


From: Gert Doering <ge= rt@space.net>
To: N= alini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> =
Sent: Monday, March 3= 1, 2014 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment

=0AHi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Na= lini Elkins wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohamm= ad Aazam wrote:
> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning = in IPv6? Because migration
> > towards IPv6 would require tunnelin= g for a reasonable period, until IPv6
> > completely takes over fr= om IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead
> > would affec= t the overall efficiency and data delivery.
>
> >The period= for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.
>
> You have = got to be kidding.   Most large enterprises are just starting to learn= to spell IPv6.  I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their 5= -year plan yet.  And these are MAJOR US corporations.

Yeah, the= US.  "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?

> Just try= ing to inject a little reality into the conversation.

I tend to forget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mob= ile networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-)
=
Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have= you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG    &n= bsp;                   Vorstan= d: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14      &n= bsp;   Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen&nb= sp;                 HRB: 136055 (A= G Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444          = USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

_____________________________________________= __
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

<= br>
--36908767-385788044-1396279872=:93301-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:38:01 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4BDB1A6F14 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:37:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rQOLuSS1zdcm for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:37:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (mobil.space.net [IPv6:2001:608:2:81::67]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C3CF1A0862 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:37:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mobil.space.net (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E35602AB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:37:47 +0200 (CEST) X-SpaceNet-Relay: true Received: from moebius3.space.net (moebius3.Space.Net [IPv6:2001:608:2:2::250]) by mobil.space.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF7E46012B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:37:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 49536 invoked by uid 1007); 31 Mar 2014 17:37:46 +0200 Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:37:46 +0200 From: Gert Doering To: Bill Jouris Message-ID: <20140331153746.GT43641@Space.Net> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IGDj+UZrxnxqm9bH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> X-NCC-RegID: de.space User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/mnxTwOU8ENCYYOixJhQEwAeLsxI Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:37:55 -0000 --IGDj+UZrxnxqm9bH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:12AM -0700, Bill Jouris wrote: > "...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6" >=20 > Fine, as far as it goes.=A0 There is, however, a little problem with band= width using wireless vs wired.=A0 So while wireless may be great for trying= out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to= get real work done. It really depends on what you need. If you need a business ISP, there's ISPs like NTT that have been offering fully commercially supported IPv6 (as in "not an 'experimental' service") for a decade now. I have no idea how widespread NTT's coverage is, in the US - in europe, they are available in all "major" internet hubs at least. If you're looking for an end user ISP, LTE bandwidth is more than you can get in rural countries in DE - so I wouldn't frown on that... Gert Doering -- NetMaster --=20 have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 --IGDj+UZrxnxqm9bH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIVAwUBUzmLyt9WwGXkzn/FAQLL1A/+PUic5K5sSeYqus4R+fh1DH+sxZZV8q9d +2KiYmkTm99mT0bC8zoj/C3+q/PlyKdM3SUnNZR44XNWf1X1ySLztHJ8ci4Z7nLi VM17nE3b12J4l4vRWZTkPNyIvwtnU0R5KKsrnsQFhX+X8FYLdHL/wlnlIVltahhT 2F9xu79jQB/cNdmQhpVA+Tditxi5dytIY4rKUs8ikQzruwSCnXx2chSdHnReIv8m bMD26HIBBqGbNdQpDZIogWS3O+3b45mpeP4GISeZZDWRHJcoOTRN/cmroJ2kEB2g mtVh4aQ0rGWG9awYPUViFqJzMwzZvkgcGrfD9u/2AoyITWOdwhMyeeqwViFkdDk/ j9rTCysrO1rbjYnLZLYm/wZZNc1yi7yCj8SWZtRZ9Kq3ofTUO9L0zQnoAC1Q5uoS VS2QUil7cFlGWoWxfhardzeuuoHTHoUAYULofhbGFqPefpGjiOwaJgiLtcVKN4e2 o1j+TrbtsuY6f8VWAg+lZq6Jo+ZFL5VufiNjMdWz0dvympSEAo27P1t9VxO8Opw4 9QY4qZaeuRWBN5nEPRKP1sKzlM/Aqdp5bOWBKzEAZiOruuXLrH7AxPP8Rph0cGHu ldGZuV6pX+iccSfxA9DDXT3JKe4pxyLLaqd8TkzyeZr6kR9hhjJQqlaI+BsvAS60 IY+jhe+JAC4= =JVZJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IGDj+UZrxnxqm9bH-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:45:13 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 444131A0505 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:45:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CA8J54zfviiA for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:45:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDB911A6F1E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:45:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18B071B83ED for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E60C190043; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:44:59 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:44:57 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <95363B6E-AA90-4F4A-AE74-30C054D018B8@nominum.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/bUAUrYucj2DABF8-bcRqqHQzN_U Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:45:07 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 10:48 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson = wrote: > Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/ > As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the = world. Unfortunately, those of us who live in backwaters still have IPv4-only = service, despite being connected via Comcast. This is certainly the = case where I live, and apparently also where Nalini lives. From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:48:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B06421A0564 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:48:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rW6VTs-Xv61b for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 723DD1A6F3E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9219C1B83ED for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE6A190043; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:47:50 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <53398558.8070503@bogus.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:47:48 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <85829891-FD22-469F-8054-446357DE0D59@nominum.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53398558.8070503@bogus.com> To: Joel Jaeggli X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Bn5-kTHz96CN_xRAZWQgmebVU0I Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:48:07 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 11:10 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: > but you need that for more than 40 down anyway. 20 is the most I can get. :) From nobody Mon Mar 31 08:49:06 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A94E1A6F0B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:49:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W9CeuRxiTyH9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:49:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from a0i308.smtpcorp.com (a0i308.smtpcorp.com [216.22.15.140]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3341A0884 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 08:49:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=smtpcorp.com; s=a0_1; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From; bh=1gM/734RxuE1xVMb6SZLRcUadb/cAaxL8Uy/uNlXsmM=; b=b3o3pXYjqTWxqbzWk8uRYkii5QjvrHL8jkc4NvbNTUwRy+3wBEnwZhLjv/aQ1PEChCbJvB2Ml7x1lu1PaimrUPU2H4JBQpbCgPcm/FIMGsq+dzkciyk6peTRiCt2/DXEBbxKttGB8/QMNvYNmhc1HJebAeXT3jVE7L5oepIZFzA=; From: Daniel Corbe To: Ted Lemon References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <95363B6E-AA90-4F4A-AE74-30C054D018B8@nominum.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:48:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <95363B6E-AA90-4F4A-AE74-30C054D018B8@nominum.com> (Ted Lemon's message of "Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:44:57 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Smtpcorp-Track: 454117588.1.6076508 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/9b5lklT5bvTWW2bkhhEmnrTP4Wo Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:49:03 -0000 Ted Lemon writes: > On Mar 31, 2014, at 10:48 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/ >> As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the world. > > Unfortunately, those of us who live in backwaters still have IPv4-only > service, despite being connected via Comcast. This is certainly the > case where I live, and apparently also where Nalini lives. > Which is still a long way away from "we're never going to get it." Which is what the OP seemed to imply. Comcast customers need to be a little more forceful with their monopolistic overlords. From nobody Mon Mar 31 09:08:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1A1A1A0849 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oilkEacDRWHB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60C4D1A0564 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E3F61B83ED for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76DBA190043; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:08:04 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:07:59 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <70D8BF49-6D7C-48C9-BB96-A7F0668C511C@nominum.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <95363B6E-AA90-4F4A-AE74-30C054D018B8@nominum.com> To: Daniel Corbe X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ds_5hZkBocQBQGtzTb-QS89fQKg Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:08:09 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Daniel Corbe wrote: > Which is still a long way away from "we're never going to get it." > Which is what the OP seemed to imply. I think she just said "not here yet, no idea when it will be." John's = deadline of 1Q2014 (from his slides) has already passed. I know this = is hard, but we've been waiting a _long_ time, so it's hard to be = optimistic. > Comcast customers need to be a > little more forceful with their monopolistic overlords. We have _zero_ leverage. That's the problem with monopolies. From nobody Mon Mar 31 09:14:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72D421A0564 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:14:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NBOGwkZX7a_S for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm21-vm9.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm21-vm9.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.62.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4EAD1A088C for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.168] by nm21.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 16:14:42 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.230] by tm4.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 16:14:42 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1001.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 16:14:42 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 713632.62126.bm@omp1001.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 32096 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 16:14:42 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396282482; bh=yL6oXIQhq/z1nSyzHCd8G2UfumvnBDItKl+DSuRxKVE=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=H6VLiwi/viDHJNb/6zYIdeHZ0x1Bia8OU5HFWwZWtFANbzdtLNdzfbDQl0086+cfj3AQF53knWUuq4zmqQLPNGfSJL87ExsV+n55hRtEmKVbxCSc/H1J/4QDlMNmP0J9zEcLLHlD40ltsOb9Ah5huMbxLjLJ1Uz9SyBVoBiaDtY= X-YMail-OSG: oA5BeDwVM1muK2rWVojelgjKwKKj4_A2onzlNFHTIJx1TUg psdJq.Prs0uR_66ScMq3a2Dg01mbJe2_7xlyJtIQ.u3wQ_3uoDY3l7rYxafa 5KZ7Vvr2Z_cxSbzwRgz3lp5N03V41ziAgGXcHwKg4M.5gVhs3.KJeGCCVcO7 Ihspol4k5cwU2fig6crTBf07lVev5FM.zOWt0cBq9cswYqTN4lmmH5pNVFa5 pXFtvjGIvl.0ePYCLcRSg_qgmtK7IDo78B8oI39ZTstMKT_AghyBVLfwcoCA HYyuWzjBL.TF.k359qMjcGGYdpDE36ygTVHqPJeLok7ME6Vv8_Z4y5xdphad wTXrkOvJ03bDw9qEXxrbsasbG1v96.AsK6C8.TkLZUmYPliHXGY_EXBURKZ1 TffamXOZ.x9zVCspl0z3SINCeXRFUVXRzpxkKbn3LcVaUJ8CRswSp_LPjHcH 6z4Avw5WRs8NzcMx7yaAnP_.3IZBZpTc3dnoYzmUcfTrPIPlAGWSeTpL2ngj UP8iFliqf4ocoHZ76KJnCgagPYKQYI0TmP5TYcT6c_DQcpXm6 Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:14:41 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, KzEKwqAKCk9uIE1hciAzMSwgMjAxNCwgYXQgMTE6NDggQU0sIERhbmllbCBDb3JiZSA8Y29yYmVAY29yYmUubmV0PiB3cm90ZToKPiBXaGljaCBpcyBzdGlsbCBhIGxvbmcgd2F5IGF3YXkgZnJvbSAid2UncmUgbmV2ZXIgZ29pbmcgdG8gZ2V0IGl0LiIKPiBXaGljaCBpcyB3aGF0IHRoZSBPUCBzZWVtZWQgdG8gaW1wbHkuCgpJIHRoaW5rIHNoZSBqdXN0IHNhaWQgIm5vdCBoZXJlIHlldCwgbm8gaWRlYSB3aGVuIGl0IHdpbGwgYmUuIsKgICBKb2huJ3MgZGVhZGxpbmUgb2YgMVEyMDE0IChmcm9tIGhpcyBzbGkBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <95363B6E-AA90-4F4A-AE74-30C054D018B8@nominum.com> <70D8BF49-6D7C-48C9-BB96-A7F0668C511C@nominum.com> Message-ID: <1396282481.26303.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 09:14:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: Ted Lemon , Daniel Corbe In-Reply-To: <70D8BF49-6D7C-48C9-BB96-A7F0668C511C@nominum.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="36908767-441325421-1396282481=:26303" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_lL8yVbiZhZOD8p_Orb098cnwbQ Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:14:48 -0000 --36908767-441325421-1396282481=:26303 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +1=0A=A0=0A=0AOn Mar 31, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Daniel Corbe = wrote:=0A> Which is still a long way away from "we're never going to get it= ."=0A> Which is what the OP seemed to imply.=0A=0AI think she just said "no= t here yet, no idea when it will be."=A0 John's deadline of 1Q2014 (from h= is slides) has already passed.=A0 I know this is hard, but we've been wait= ing a _long_ time, so it's hard to be optimistic.=0A=0A> Comcast customers = need to be a=0A> little more forceful with their monopolistic overlords.=0A= =0AWe have _zero_ leverage.=A0 That's the problem with monopolies.=0A=0A__= _____________________________________________=0Av6ops mailing list=0Av6ops@= ietf.org=0Ahttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --36908767-441325421-1396282481=:26303 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+1
<= /div>
 

=0AOn Mar 31, 2014, at 11:48 AM, Daniel Corbe <corbe@corbe.net>= ; wrote:
> Which is still a long way away from "we're never going to = get it."
> Which is what the OP seemed to imply.

I think she j= ust said "not here yet, no idea when it will be."  John's deadline of= 1Q2014 (from his slides) has already passed.  I know this is hard, b= ut we've been waiting a _long_ time, so it's hard to be optimistic.

= > Comcast customers need to be a
> little more forceful with their= monopolistic overlords.

We have _zero_ leverage.  That's the = problem with monopolies.

___________________________________________= ____
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

<= br>
--36908767-441325421-1396282481=:26303-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 10:35:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F01E1A6F15 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:35:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IT18yNwLJDyj for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm20-vm2.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm20-vm2.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D733B1A6EF9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:35:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.174] by nm20.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 17:35:41 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.238] by tm10.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 17:35:41 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1009.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 17:35:41 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 695291.74562.bm@omp1009.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 22357 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 17:35:40 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396287340; bh=y8iqIQSUWgQ5dTMhS0SU7kxLeIg+CEEP/Xfur5k1D5U=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=OYjfBaH9I3CFSzAYd8s/l1iTpHBVvMjgHE0pEhVVWXYej/fic/o12Szx6Qd2nuxM5OKETqFQxMVmzJUnNhLj+4+24UQzrTvZJ8d4R0Kd041ZTnrsyc3Aio9PeIgcX3zZkDIseNx3xebiix7xNVTJax9wAnwF86UzFZPgsbBxV50= X-YMail-OSG: YG9XVNsVM1nhNc2RbGKI3QohX66kUxinLVtMceD5jxwPmuw lnPwXGdHshPmjiF1EaV5rY8EkMOJWpiimSZgPMYF1No1USG10DvSU.1N3kq0 gYWvEAYjD_1RBF546Fn7_GkAf7O1X0jA0aGBL4piZdh33aasbMA_3sk8S3VH pW4zoGpPPwAUTgQdWYiiVBpqhO2Ks18n68Ao3CqQMzg_KRe1hRg6dfc8tE7Z eGvkHMJQFa3Tc5Z9ICvS9dG9skGYqFpwqotJJgxO5KSP1mAFObWBjq6az9_8 lNGjiEay9dNs5ygyb87HvAGfZIsRO0EiFUvnGuOiyJHjENGHQPWrtWgY0lMc y48vA4seTGHxm_wvFm5PSlPGzja9.CW7iOO_CusuxgOi6O143LZJx1APNpVm i03aFGcCf92jkVS7O7qunhCzE55q8na3zzIQ_Zn.LncQa2Hy0b6rSO9JwTeI Tk9ZU9Zt5e37wszu4tkbNCC5B_fcoZgb0g5K4s8RywvXM4_UUaH0WAdA.LHo GfdvyV3DplZsrs5gnRs1kKHxk8f2IbZBtxIKTpkFqpw-- Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:35:40 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, VG8gZmluaXNoIG91dCB0aGlzIHRocmVhZDoKCj5XaGVuIGxpc3RlbmluZyB0byBDb21jYXN0IHN0YWZmIHByZXNlbnRhdGlvbnMgb24gdGhpcyBpc3N1ZSwgaXQgZGlkbid0IHNlZW0gbGlrZSBzb21ldGhpbmcgeW91IG5lZWQgdG8gYXNrIGZvciBhbmQgdGhleSB0dXJuIGl0IG9uIG9ubHkgZm9yIHlvdSwgaW5zdGVhZCBpdCdsbCBiZSB0dXJuZWQgb24gd2hlbmV2ZXIgdGhleSdyZSBkb25lIHdpdGggeW91ciBhcmVhLgoKCkkgdGFsa2VkIHRvIHRoZSBsb2NhbCBDb21jYXN0IG9mZmljZSAxLzIgYW4gaG91ciABMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1396287340.39942.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 10:35:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson In-Reply-To: <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-1551098171-246083897-1396287340=:39942" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/2yOPOAw-YvAdzXnktfyCM7oCAF8 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:35:46 -0000 ---1551098171-246083897-1396287340=:39942 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To finish out this thread:=0A=0A>When listening to Comcast staff presentati= ons on this issue, it didn't seem like something you need to ask for and th= ey turn it on only for you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're don= e with your area.=0A=0A=0AI talked to the local Comcast office 1/2 an hour = ago. =A0They said "No IPv6. =A0No ETA on when it might be available."=0A=0A= I commend Comcast on their efforts in implementing IPv6. =A0 It is just tha= t some of who live in rural areas would like it also. =A0 I know it takes a= while to get coverage everywhere and these are business decisions.=0A=0AI = will stop by the local Verizon office this afternoon and ask about the dong= le that Joel spoke of.=0A=0AThanks,=0ANalini ---1551098171-246083897-1396287340=:39942 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To finish out this thread:<= /div>
>When listening to Comcast staff presentations = on this issue, it didn't seem like something you need to ask for and they t= urn it on only for you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're done wi= th your area.

I talked to the local Comcast office 1/2 an hour ago.  They said "No IP= v6.  No ETA on when it might be available."

I commend Comcast on the= ir efforts in implementing IPv6.   It is just that some of who live in= rural areas would like it also.   I know it takes a while to get cove= rage everywhere and these are business decisions.

I will stop by the loca= l Verizon office this afternoon and ask about the dongle that Joel spoke of= .

Thanks,
Nalini
=
---1551098171-246083897-1396287340=:39942-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 11:51:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2F51A6F50 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:51:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.844 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.844 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3qO7ZoVtWjhp for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33FB41A6F3B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.115]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123641511; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:51:38 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by PACDCEXHUB02.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::492e:3fa1:c2ad:e04e%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:51:38 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: joel jaeggli , Mikael Abrahamsson , Nalini Elkins Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPTRA+x9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925r7ilqA Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:51:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <53398558.8070503@bogus.com> In-Reply-To: <53398558.8070503@bogus.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.247] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/R89WFD3WBu_WhYAJFOGeQpcWxlI Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:51:49 -0000 RE9DU0lTIDMuMCBhbmQgbWFueSBwcmUgRE9DU0lTIDMuMCBkZXZpY2VzIHN1cHBvcnQgSVB2Niwg c2VlIHRoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmc6DQoNCmh0dHA6Ly9teWRldmljZWluZm8uY29tY2FzdC5uZXQNCg0K aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQNCg0KSm9obg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCkpvaG4gSmFzb24gQnJ6b3pvd3NraQ0KQ29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZQ0K bSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02NTk0DQpvKSA0ODQtOTYyLTAwNjANCncpIHd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQNCmUp IGpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbQ0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0t LS0tDQpGcm9tOiBKb2VsIEphZWdnbGkgPGpvZWxqYUBib2d1cy5jb20+DQpEYXRlOiBNb25kYXks IE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IGF0IDExOjEwDQpUbzogTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VA c3dtLnBwLnNlPiwgTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucw0KPG5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2su Y29tPg0KQ2M6IHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZh Y2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQNCg0KPk9uIDMvMzEvMTQsIDg6MDMgQU0sIE1pa2FlbCBBYnJh aGFtc3NvbiB3cm90ZToNCj4+IE9uIE1vbiwgMzEgTWFyIDIwMTQsIE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgd3Jv dGU6DQo+PiANCj4+IFdoZW4gbGlzdGVuaW5nIHRvIENvbWNhc3Qgc3RhZmYgcHJlc2VudGF0aW9u cyBvbiB0aGlzIGlzc3VlLCBpdCBkaWRuJ3QNCj4+IHNlZW0gbGlrZSBzb21ldGhpbmcgeW91IG5l ZWQgdG8gYXNrIGZvciBhbmQgdGhleSB0dXJuIGl0IG9uIG9ubHkgZm9yDQo+PiB5b3UsIGluc3Rl YWQgaXQnbGwgYmUgdHVybmVkIG9uIHdoZW5ldmVyIHRoZXkncmUgZG9uZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgYXJl YS4NCj4NCj55b3Ugd2lsbCBuZWVkIGEgZG9jc2lzIDMuMCBtb2RlbS4uLg0KPg0KPmJ1dCB5b3Ug bmVlZCB0aGF0IGZvciBtb3JlIHRoYW4gNDAgZG93biBhbnl3YXkuDQo+DQo+PiANCj4+IA0KPj4g X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18NCj4+IHY2b3Bz IG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPj4gdjZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmlldGYub3Jn L21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vdjZvcHMNCj4+IA0KPg0KPg0KDQo= From nobody Mon Mar 31 11:53:34 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B69E1A6F3B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:53:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.844 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.844 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id valhIth6tqxz for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A30A81A6F50 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.116]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123641965; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:53:24 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by pacdcexhub03.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::5527:6d6b:29a7:f414%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:53:19 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPTRA3x9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925r7itIA Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:53:19 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.249] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <400EF2246ED29745932494CB84BCD74D@cable.comcast.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/GlxaiA9LUj5kLbPex3O0gHqQ0LU Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:53:32 -0000 RldJVyAtIHdlIGFyZSBkZXBsb3lpbmcgSVB2NiBuYXRpb253aWRlLiAgV2UgYXJlIG5lYXJseSA5 MCUgY29tcGxldGUgd2l0aA0KMzAlKyBvZiBvdXIgY3VzdG9tZXJzIGFjdGl2ZWx5IHByb3Zpc2lv bmVkIHdpdGggbmF0aXZlIGR1YWwgc3RhY2suDQoNClRoZSAzMCUgd2lsbCBpbmNyZWFzZSB0aHJv dWdob3V0IHRoZSB5ZWFyIGludG8gbmV4dCB5ZWFyIGFuZCBiZXlvbmQuDQoNCkpvaG4NCj09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQpKb2huIEphc29uIEJyem96b3dz a2kNCkNvbWNhc3QgQ2FibGUNCm0pIDYwOS0zNzctNjU5NA0KbykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwDQp3KSB3 d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0DQplKSBqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29tY2FzdC5jb20NCj09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KDQotLS0t LU9yaWdpbmFsIE1lc3NhZ2UtLS0tLQ0KRnJvbTogTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyA8bmFsaW5pLmVsa2lu c0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb20+DQpSZXBseS1UbzogTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyA8bmFsaW5pLmVs a2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb20+DQpEYXRlOiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IGF0 IDExOjEyDQpUbzogTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPg0KQ2M6IHY2 b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRl cGxveW1lbnQNCg0KPiANCj4NCj5PbiBNb24sIDMxIE1hciAyMDE0LCBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5zIHdy b3RlOg0KPg0KPj4+IENvbWNhc3QgaXMgaW5kZWVkIGRvaW5nIElQdjYgYnV0IGl0IHNlZW1zIHRv IGRlcGVuZCBvbiBob3cgY2xvc2UgeW91DQo+Pj5hcmUgdG8gYSBtYWpvciB1cmJhbiBjZW50ZXIu ICAgSSBoYXZlIGFza2VkIGJlZm9yZSBhbmQgd2FzIHRvbGQgdGhhdCBpdA0KPj4+d2FzIG5vdCBh dmFpbGFibGUgaW4gbXkgYXJlYS4gIEJUVywgIEkgIGRvIG5vdCBsaXZlIENPTVBMRVRFTFkgaW4g dGhlDQo+Pj5taWRkbGUgb2Ygbm93aGVyZS4gICBKdXN0IHdoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4gYWN0dWFsbHkg YmUgc3Vycm91bmRlZCBieSB0cmVlcw0KPj4+YW5kIGNsZWFuIGFpci4NCj4+PiANCj4+PiBUaGUg bG9jYWwgb2ZmaWNlIG9wZW5zIGF0IDk6MDBhbSBteSB0aW1lLiAgKGFib3V0IGFuIGhvdXIpLiAg SSB3aWxsDQo+Pj5hc2sgYWdhaW4gKG5pY2VseSEpIGFuZCBwb3N0IHRoZSByZXN1bHRzIG9mIHdo YXQgSSBnZXQuICBJIGhvcGUgdG8NCj4+PnN0YW5kIGNvcnJlY3RlZC4NCj4NCj4+V2hlbiBsaXN0 ZW5pbmcgdG8gQ29tY2FzdCBzdGFmZiBwcmVzZW50YXRpb25zIG9uIHRoaXMgaXNzdWUsIGl0IGRp ZG4ndA0KPj5zZWVtIGxpa2Ugc29tZXRoaW5nIHlvdSBuZWVkIHRvIGFzayBmb3IgYW5kIHRoZXkg dHVybiBpdCBvbiBvbmx5IGZvcg0KPj55b3UsIGluc3RlYWQgaXQnbGwgYmUgdHVybmVkIG9uIHdo ZW5ldmVyIHRoZXkncmUgZG9uZSB3aXRoIHlvdXIgYXJlYS4NCj4NCj5TdXJlLiAgVGhhdCBpcyBp bmRlZWQgdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uLiAgIFRoZXkgZG8gc29tZSBhcmVhcyBiZWZvcmUgb3RoZXJzDQo+ KGFuZCByaWdodGZ1bGx5IHNvIC0gdGhleSBhcmUgaW4gYnVzaW5lc3MgYW5kIG5lZWQgdG8gZ2V0 IHRoZSBtYWpvcml0eSBvZg0KPnRoZWlyIGN1c3RvbWVycyB3aG8gbGl2ZSBpbiB0aGUgdXJiYW4g Y2VudGVycy4gIENvbWNhc3QgaXMgYSB2ZXJ5IHdlbGwNCj5ydW4gYnVzaW5lc3MuKQ0KPg0KPkkg YW0ganVzdCBzYXlpbmcgdGhhdCBtYW55IG9mIHVzLCBhdCBsZWFzdCBpbiB0aGUgVVMsIGRvIG5v dCBsaXZlIGluDQo+dXJiYW4gY2VudGVycyAtIGJ5IGNob2ljZS4gICBCVFcsIGl0IHRvb2sgdXMg eWVhcnMgdG8gZ2V0IGhpZ2ggc3BlZWQNCj5icm9hZGJhbmQgYXMgd2VsbC4gIFByb2JhYmx5IDUg eWVhcnMgYWZ0ZXIgdGhlIG1ham9yIHVyYmFuIGNlbnRlciBpbiBteQ0KPmFyZWEgKFNhbiBKb3Nl IC8gU2FuIEZyYW5jaXNjbykgaGFkIGl0LiAgSSBoYXZlIGFuIGFydGlzdCBmcmllbmQgd2hvDQo+ bGl2ZXMgaW4gcXVpdGUgYSBydXJhbCBhcmVhIGluIHRoZSBtaWRkbGUgb2YgdGhlIFVTIGFuZCBz aGUgZG9lcyBub3QgaGF2ZQ0KPmhpZ2ggc3BlZWQgYnJvYWRiYW5kIHlldC4NCj4NCj5JTUhPLCB0 aGVyZSB3aWxsIGJlIGZvciBhIGxvbmcgdGltZSBpc3N1ZXMgYWxvbmcgdGhlIGxpbmVzIG9mIGRp Z2l0YWwNCj5kaXZpZGUuICBUaG9zZSB3aG8gaGF2ZSBuYXRpdmUgSVB2NiBhbmQgdGhvc2Ugd2hv IGRvIG5vdC4NCj4NCj5BbmQsIHRoZSBpc3N1ZXMgd2lsbCBiZSB0aG9zZSBvZiB0aGUgZWRnZS4N Cj4NCj5OYWxpbmkNCj4NCj5fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fXw0KPnY2b3BzIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdA0KPnY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnDQo+aHR0cHM6Ly93 d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvbWFpbG1hbi9saXN0aW5mby92Nm9wcw0KDQo= From nobody Mon Mar 31 11:55:33 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A344F1A6F52 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:55:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.843 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vfkUWuQePZCP for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213901A6F50 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:55:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.122]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123642363; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:55:15 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by pacdcexhub05.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3d40:bdea:7266:7f5a%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:24 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPRSXNx9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925rsFbiAgA69PICAAAkXgIAAh2kAgAAqsoCAAAVhAIAABKKA///BHtCAAATJQIAAPSCA Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:55:14 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.249] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF5F31F814D738johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ackermann, Michael" , Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/TcEMaSLK7H0CF1sohMQK03cRA9M Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 18:55:23 -0000 --_000_CF5F31F814D738johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 UGVvcGxlIHdobyBhcmUgQ29tY2FzdCBjdXN0b21lcnMgdGhhdCBkbyBub3QgaGF2ZSBJUHY2IGNh biBjb250YWN0IG1lIG9mZmxpbmUgb3IgdW5pY2FzdCB2aWEgZW1haWwuDQoNClRvIGRhdGUgd2Ug aGF2ZSBsYXVuY2hlZCByZXNpZGVudGlhbCBicm9hZGJhbmQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgbmF0aXZlIElQ djYuICBDb21tZXJjaWFsIERPQ1NJUyBJUHY2IHN1cHBvcnQgaXMgaW4gcGxhbm5pbmcgYW5kIHdp bGwgYmUgbGF1bmNoZWQgc29vbiBob3BlZnVsbHkgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSBzdW1tZXIgdGltZS4NCg0K Sm9obg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCkpvaG4gSmFz b24gQnJ6b3pvd3NraQ0KQ29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZQ0KbSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02NTk0DQpvKSA0ODQtOTYy LTAwNjANCncpIHd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQNCmUpIGpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21j YXN0LmNvbTxtYWlsdG86am9obl9icnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tPg0KPT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KRnJvbTogPEFja2VybWFubj4s IE1pa2UgQWNrZXJtYW5uIDxtYWNrZXJtYW5uQGJjYnNtLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bWFja2VybWFubkBi Y2JzbS5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxMToxNw0KVG86IE5h bGluaSBFbGtpbnMgPG5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPG1haWx0bzpuYWxp bmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNvbT4+LCBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gPHN3bWlr ZUBzd20ucHAuc2U8bWFpbHRvOnN3bWlrZUBzd20ucHAuc2U+Pg0KQ2M6IHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0Bp ZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+Pg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFj ZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KDQpTYW1lIGhlcmUgaW4gTWljaGlnYW4uICAgIEkgdHJpZWQg dG8gZ2V0IElQVjYgb24gQ29tY2FzdCBhbmQgaXQgaXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgMyBh cmVhcyBJIHRyaWVkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgc3RhdGUgb2YgTUkuDQoNCg0KDQpGcm9tOiB2Nm9wcyBb bWFpbHRvOnY2b3BzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5z DQpTZW50OiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IDEwOjU5IEFNDQpUbzogTWlrYWVsIEFicmFo YW1zc29uDQpDYzogSVB2NiBPcGVyYXRpb25zDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBGYWNlYm9v ayB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50DQoNCg0KPj4gVGhlIElTUCB0byBteSBob21lIGlzIENvbWNhc3QuICBK dXN0IHNheWluZy4gIFNlZW1zIGRvdWJ0ZnVsIHRoYXQgdGhleSB3aWxsIGdvIHVuZGVyIHNpbmNl IHRoZXkgc2VlbSB0byBoYXZlIGEgbmVhciBtb25vcG9seSBpbiB0aGUgVVMuDQoNCj5Db21jYXN0 IGlzIGRvaW5nIElQdjYgb24gYSB3aWRlIHNjYWxlLiBodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldC8N Cg0KPkFzIGZhciBhcyBJIGNhbiB0ZWxsLCB0aGV5IG5vdyBoYXZlIHRoZSBsYXJnZXN0IElQdjYg ZGVwbG95bWVudCBpbiB0aGUgd29ybGQuDQoNCkd1eXMsDQoNCkNvbWNhc3QgaXMgaW5kZWVkIGRv aW5nIElQdjYgYnV0IGl0IHNlZW1zIHRvIGRlcGVuZCBvbiBob3cgY2xvc2UgeW91IGFyZSB0byBh IG1ham9yIHVyYmFuIGNlbnRlci4gICBJIGhhdmUgYXNrZWQgYmVmb3JlIGFuZCB3YXMgdG9sZCB0 aGF0IGl0IHdhcyBub3QgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGluIG15IGFyZWEuICBCVFcsICBJICBkbyBub3QgbGl2 ZSBDT01QTEVURUxZIGluIHRoZSBtaWRkbGUgb2Ygbm93aGVyZS4gICBKdXN0IHdoZXJlIHlvdSBj YW4gYWN0dWFsbHkgYmUgc3Vycm91bmRlZCBieSB0cmVlcyBhbmQgY2xlYW4gYWlyLg0KDQpUaGUg bG9jYWwgb2ZmaWNlIG9wZW5zIGF0IDk6MDBhbSBteSB0aW1lLiAgKGFib3V0IGFuIGhvdXIpLiAg SSB3aWxsIGFzayBhZ2FpbiAobmljZWx5ISkgYW5kIHBvc3QgdGhlIHJlc3VsdHMgb2Ygd2hhdCBJ IGdldC4gIEkgaG9wZSB0byBzdGFuZCBjb3JyZWN0ZWQuDQoNCk5hbGluaQ0KDQoNCg0KDQpUaGUg aW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGluIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBoaWdobHkgY29u ZmlkZW50aWFsIGFuZCBpcyBpbnRlbmRlZCBzb2xlbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2 aWR1YWwocykgdG8gd2hvbSB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgZGlyZWN0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBh cmUgbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQsIHlvdSBhcmUgaGVyZWJ5IG5vdGlmaWVkIHRo YXQgYW55IHZpZXdpbmcsIGNvcHlpbmcsIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgb3IgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uIG9mIHRo aXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gUGxlYXNlIG5vdGlmeSB0aGUgc2VuZGVyLCBi eSBlbGVjdHJvbmljIG1haWwgb3IgdGVsZXBob25lLCBvZiBhbnkgdW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNlaXB0 IGFuZCBkZWxldGUgdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aG91dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGNvcGll cy4NCg0KQmx1ZSBDcm9zcyBCbHVlIFNoaWVsZCBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhbmQgQmx1ZSBDYXJlIE5l dHdvcmsgb2YgTWljaGlnYW4gYXJlIG5vbnByb2ZpdCBjb3Jwb3JhdGlvbnMgYW5kIGluZGVwZW5k ZW50IGxpY2Vuc2VlcyBvZiB0aGUgQmx1ZSBDcm9zcyBhbmQgQmx1ZSBTaGllbGQgQXNzb2NpYXRp b24uDQo= --_000_CF5F31F814D738johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <7566FF9CE240BC47B56ADC0284298D42@cable.comcast.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAx OHB4OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 ZGl2PlBlb3BsZSB3aG8gYXJlIENvbWNhc3QgY3VzdG9tZXJzIHRoYXQgZG8gbm90IGhhdmUgSVB2 NiBjYW4gY29udGFjdCBtZSBvZmZsaW5lIG9yIHVuaWNhc3QgdmlhIGVtYWlsLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+VG8gZGF0ZSB3ZSBoYXZlIGxhdW5jaGVkIHJlc2lkZW50aWFs IGJyb2FkYmFuZCBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBuYXRpdmUgSVB2Ni4gJm5ic3A7Q29tbWVyY2lhbCBET0NT SVMgSVB2NiBzdXBwb3J0IGlzIGluIHBsYW5uaW5nIGFuZCB3aWxsIGJlIGxhdW5jaGVkIHNvb24g aG9wZWZ1bGx5IGJlZm9yZSB0aGUgc3VtbWVyIHRpbWUuPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj5Kb2huPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICdUaW1l cyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj49PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICdUaW1l cyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj5Kb2huIEphc29uIEJyem96b3dza2k8 L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9udC1z aXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+Q29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6ICdUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj5tKSA2MDktMzc3LTY1 OTQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9u dC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+bykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbic7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPncpIHd3dy5j b21jYXN0Ni5uZXQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJv bWFuJzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+ZSkmbmJzcDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86am9obl9i cnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tIj5qb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29tY2Fz dC5jb208L2E+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21h bic7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPHNwYW4gaWQ9Ik9MS19TUkNfQk9EWV9TRUNUSU9OIj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OkNhbGlicmk7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMXB0OyB0ZXh0LWFsaWduOmxlZnQ7IGNvbG9yOmJsYWNr OyBCT1JERVItQk9UVE9NOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgQk9SREVSLUxFRlQ6IG1lZGl1bSBub25lOyBQ QURESU5HLUJPVFRPTTogMGluOyBQQURESU5HLUxFRlQ6IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1SSUdIVDogMGlu OyBCT1JERVItVE9QOiAjYjVjNGRmIDFwdCBzb2xpZDsgQk9SREVSLVJJR0hUOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9u ZTsgUEFERElORy1UT1A6IDNwdCI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RnJv bTogPC9zcGFuPiZsdDtBY2tlcm1hbm4mZ3Q7LCBNaWtlIEFja2VybWFubiAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0i bWFpbHRvOm1hY2tlcm1hbm5AYmNic20uY29tIj5tYWNrZXJtYW5uQGJjYnNtLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7 PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkRhdGU6IDwvc3Bhbj5Nb25kYXks IE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IGF0IDExOjE3PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJv bGQiPlRvOiA8L3NwYW4+TmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm5hbGluaS5l bGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tIj5uYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNv bTwvYT4mZ3Q7LCBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzd21pa2VA c3dtLnBwLnNlIj5zd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+Q2M6IDwvc3Bhbj52Nm9wcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnY2b3Bz QGlldGYub3JnIj52Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt d2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPlN1YmplY3Q6IDwvc3Bhbj5SZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBGYWNlYm9vayB2NiBkZXBs b3ltZW50PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgaWQ9Ik1B Q19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJQlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiIHN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVDogI2I1 YzRkZiA1IHNvbGlkOyBQQURESU5HOjAgMCAwIDU7IE1BUkdJTjowIDAgMCA1OyI+DQo8ZGl2IHht bG5zOnY9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206dm1sIiB4bWxuczpvPSJ1cm46c2NoZW1h cy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTpvZmZpY2UiIHhtbG5zOnc9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jv c29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOndvcmQiIHhtbG5zOm09Imh0dHA6Ly9zY2hlbWFzLm1pY3Jvc29mdC5j b20vb2ZmaWNlLzIwMDQvMTIvb21tbCIgeG1sbnM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnL1RSL1JFQy1o dG1sNDAiPg0KPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAx MiAoZmlsdGVyZWQgbWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAq Lw0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToy IDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsN CglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OlRhaG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBE ZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0K CXttYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0 Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLCJzZXJpZiI7fQ0KYTpsaW5rLCBzcGFu Lk1zb0h5cGVybGluaw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6Ymx1ZTsNCgl0 ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCmE6dmlzaXRlZCwgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmtG b2xsb3dlZA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6cHVycGxlOw0KCXRleHQt ZGVjb3JhdGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5 cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsN Cgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOmV4cG9y dC1vbmx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7fQ0KQHBhZ2UgV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3NpemU6 OC41aW4gMTEuMGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbjoxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbjt9DQpkaXYuV29y ZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3BhZ2U6V29yZFNlY3Rpb24xO30NCi0tPjwvc3R5bGU+PCEtLVtpZiBndGUg bXNvIDldPjx4bWw+DQo8bzpzaGFwZWRlZmF1bHRzIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBzcGlkbWF4PSIxMDI2 IiAvPg0KPC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+PCEtLVtpZiBndGUgbXNvIDldPjx4bWw+DQo8bzpzaGFw ZWxheW91dCB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCI+DQo8bzppZG1hcCB2OmV4dD0iZWRpdCIgZGF0YT0iMSIgLz4N CjwvbzpzaGFwZWxheW91dD48L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT4NCjxkaXYgbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIGxp bms9ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0iV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4NCjxw IGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdiKDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPlNhbWUg aGVyZSBpbiBNaWNoaWdhbi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgSSB0cmllZCB0byBnZXQgSVBWNiBv biBDb21jYXN0IGFuZCBpdCBpcyBub3QgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGluIHRoZSAzIGFyZWFzIEkgdHJpZWQg d2l0aGluIHRoZSBzdGF0ZSBvZiBNSS4NCjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBD YWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdiKDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7 PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdi KDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJN c29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxp YnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdiKDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItdG9w OnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYgMS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwaW4gMGluIDBpbiI+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMHB0OyBmb250LWZhbWls eTogVGFob21hLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6IDEwcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBUYWhvbWEsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Ij4gdjZvcHMgWzxh IGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzp2Nm9wcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnIj5tYWlsdG86djZvcHMtYm91bmNl c0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT5dDQo8Yj5PbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgPC9iPk5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnM8YnI+DQo8 Yj5TZW50OjwvYj4gTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCAxMDo1OSBBTTxicj4NCjxiPlRvOjwv Yj4gTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uPGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBJUHY2IE9wZXJhdGlvbnM8YnI+ DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvYj4gUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudDxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIg c3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogQXJpYWws IHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4N CjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9 ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Jmd0OyZndDsgVGhl IElTUCB0byBteSBob21lIGlzIENvbWNhc3QuICZuYnNwO0p1c3Qgc2F5aW5nLiAmbmJzcDtTZWVt cyBkb3VidGZ1bCB0aGF0IHRoZXkgd2lsbCBnbyB1bmRlciBzaW5jZSB0aGV5IHNlZW0gdG8gaGF2 ZSBhIG5lYXIgbW9ub3BvbHkgaW4gdGhlIFVTLjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZndDtDb21jYXN0IGlzIGRv aW5nIElQdjYgb24gYSB3aWRlIHNjYWxlLiA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5l dC8iPmh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0LzwvYT48YnI+DQo8YnI+DQomZ3Q7QXMgZmFyIGFz IEkgY2FuIHRlbGwsIHRoZXkgbm93IGhhdmUgdGhlIGxhcmdlc3QgSVB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50IGlu IHRoZSB3b3JsZC48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9y OmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNv bG9yOmJsYWNrIj5HdXlzLCZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkNvbWNhc3QgaXMgaW5kZWVkIGRvaW5nIElQdjYgYnV0IGl0 IHNlZW1zIHRvIGRlcGVuZCBvbiBob3cgY2xvc2UgeW91IGFyZSB0byBhIG1ham9yIHVyYmFuIGNl bnRlci4gJm5ic3A7IEkgaGF2ZSBhc2tlZCBiZWZvcmUgYW5kIHdhcyB0b2xkIHRoYXQgaXQgd2Fz IG5vdCBhdmFpbGFibGUgaW4gbXkgYXJlYS4gJm5ic3A7QlRXLCAmbmJzcDtJICZuYnNwO2RvIG5v dA0KIGxpdmUgQ09NUExFVEVMWSBpbiB0aGUgbWlkZGxlIG9mIG5vd2hlcmUuICZuYnNwOyBKdXN0 IHdoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4gYWN0dWFsbHkgYmUgc3Vycm91bmRlZCBieSB0cmVlcyBhbmQgY2xlYW4g YWlyLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29O b3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2si PjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJN c29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPlRoZSBsb2NhbCBvZmZpY2Ugb3BlbnMgYXQgOTowMGFtIG15IHRpbWUuICZuYnNwOyhhYm91 dCBhbiBob3VyKS4gJm5ic3A7SSB3aWxsIGFzayBhZ2FpbiAobmljZWx5ISkgYW5kIHBvc3QgdGhl IHJlc3VsdHMgb2Ygd2hhdCBJIGdldC4gJm5ic3A7SSBob3BlIHRvIHN0YW5kIGNvcnJlY3RlZC4g Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xh c3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xv cjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+TmFsaW5pPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9w Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxicj4NCjxwPlRoZSBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWluZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGlzIGhpZ2hseSBjb25m aWRlbnRpYWwgYW5kIGlzIGludGVuZGVkIHNvbGVseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgaW5kaXZp ZHVhbChzKSB0byB3aG9tIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBkaXJlY3RlZC4gSWYgeW91IGFy ZSBub3QgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCwgeW91IGFyZSBoZXJlYnkgbm90aWZpZWQgdGhh dCBhbnkgdmlld2luZywgY29weWluZywNCiBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIG9yIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiBvZiB0 aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIFBsZWFzZSBub3RpZnkgdGhlIHNlbmRlciwg YnkgZWxlY3Ryb25pYyBtYWlsIG9yIHRlbGVwaG9uZSwgb2YgYW55IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjZWlw dCBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBtZXNzYWdlIHdpdGhvdXQgbWFraW5nIGFueSBjb3Bp ZXMuPC9wPg0KPHA+Qmx1ZSBDcm9zcyBCbHVlIFNoaWVsZCBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhbmQgQmx1ZSBD YXJlIE5ldHdvcmsgb2YgTWljaGlnYW4gYXJlIG5vbnByb2ZpdCBjb3Jwb3JhdGlvbnMgYW5kIGlu ZGVwZW5kZW50IGxpY2Vuc2VlcyBvZiB0aGUgQmx1ZSBDcm9zcyBhbmQgQmx1ZSBTaGllbGQgQXNz b2NpYXRpb24uPC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjwvc3Bhbj4NCjwv Ym9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_CF5F31F814D738johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 12:01:50 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6DA1A6F52 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:01:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.844 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.844 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kMMw1Xd0f74K for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63ED11A6F3B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:01:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.114]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123644174; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:01:10 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by PACDCEXHUB01.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::bdc4:5b5c:ee33:b058%16]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:01:28 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Ted Lemon , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPTROex9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c92w== Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:01:27 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.247] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/gma8_kQGMJbsDIh77P4ChUqzIFw Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:01:49 -0000 VGVkLA0KDQpQYXJ0cyBvZiBOZXcgRW5nbGFuZCBoYXZlIHN0YXJ0ZWQgdG8gc2VlIG5hdGl2ZSBJ UHY2IHN1cHBvcnQgZGVwbG95ZWQuICBJDQprbm93IHlvdSBhbmQgb3RoZXJzIGhhdmUgYmVlbiB3 YWl0aW5nIHBhdGllbnRseS4NCg0KSm9obg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT0NCkpvaG4gSmFzb24gQnJ6b3pvd3NraQ0KQ29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZQ0KbSkgNjA5 LTM3Ny02NTk0DQpvKSA0ODQtOTYyLTAwNjANCncpIHd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQNCmUpIGpvaG5f YnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbQ0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCi0tLS0tT3JpZ2luYWwgTWVzc2FnZS0tLS0tDQpG cm9tOiBUZWQgTGVtb24gPFRlZC5MZW1vbkBub21pbnVtLmNvbT4NCkRhdGU6IE1vbmRheSwgTWFy Y2ggMzEsIDIwMTQgYXQgMTE6NDQNClRvOiBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gPHN3bWlrZUBzd20u cHAuc2U+DQpDYzogdjZvcHMgPHY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnPg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10g RmFjZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KDQo+T24gTWFyIDMxLCAyMDE0LCBhdCAxMDo0OCBBTSwg TWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPiB3cm90ZToNCj4+IENvbWNhc3Qg aXMgZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBvbiBhIHdpZGUgc2NhbGUuIGh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0Lw0K Pj4gQXMgZmFyIGFzIEkgY2FuIHRlbGwsIHRoZXkgbm93IGhhdmUgdGhlIGxhcmdlc3QgSVB2NiBk ZXBsb3ltZW50IGluIHRoZQ0KPj53b3JsZC4NCj4NCj5VbmZvcnR1bmF0ZWx5LCB0aG9zZSBvZiB1 cyB3aG8gbGl2ZSBpbiBiYWNrd2F0ZXJzIHN0aWxsIGhhdmUgSVB2NC1vbmx5DQo+c2VydmljZSwg ZGVzcGl0ZSBiZWluZyBjb25uZWN0ZWQgdmlhIENvbWNhc3QuICAgVGhpcyBpcyBjZXJ0YWlubHkg dGhlDQo+Y2FzZSB3aGVyZSBJIGxpdmUsIGFuZCBhcHBhcmVudGx5IGFsc28gd2hlcmUgTmFsaW5p IGxpdmVzLg0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fDQo+djZvcHMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0DQo+djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5p ZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL3Y2b3BzDQoNCg== From nobody Mon Mar 31 12:03:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C64661A08B4 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:03:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.843 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ePps6NE1a6Nw for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5FE1A08B1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.122]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123644638; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:39 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by pacdcexhub05.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::3d40:bdea:7266:7f5a%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:49 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPTPOsx9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925r7uGsA///VgwA= Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:03:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396278768.42748.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396287340.39942.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396287340.39942.YahooMailNeo@web2803.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.247] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF5F343C14D75Ejohnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/twoNJeOO-ivhPL6K3CRL2vW6eMs Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:03:49 -0000 --_000_CF5F343C14D75Ejohnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 TmFsaW5pLA0KDQpJIHdpbGwgZW1haWwgeW91IHVuaWNhc3QuDQoNCkpvaG4NCj09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQpKb2huIEphc29uIEJyem96b3dza2kNCkNv bWNhc3QgQ2FibGUNCm0pIDYwOS0zNzctNjU5NA0KbykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwDQp3KSB3d3cuY29t Y2FzdDYubmV0DQplKSBqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29tY2FzdC5jb208bWFpbHRvOmpv aG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbT4NCj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoNCkZyb206IE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgPG5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNA aW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPG1haWx0bzpuYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNv bT4+DQpSZXBseS1UbzogTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyA8bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFj ay5jb208bWFpbHRvOm5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPj4NCkRhdGU6IE1v bmRheSwgTWFyY2ggMzEsIDIwMTQgYXQgMTM6MzUNClRvOiBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5zIDxuYWxpbmku ZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVz dGFjay5jb20+PiwgTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPG1haWx0bzpz d21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPj4NCkNjOiB2Nm9wcyA8djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOnY2b3Bz QGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQN Cg0KVG8gZmluaXNoIG91dCB0aGlzIHRocmVhZDoNCg0KPldoZW4gbGlzdGVuaW5nIHRvIENvbWNh c3Qgc3RhZmYgcHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBvbiB0aGlzIGlzc3VlLCBpdCBkaWRuJ3Qgc2VlbSBsaWtl IHNvbWV0aGluZyB5b3UgbmVlZCB0byBhc2sgZm9yIGFuZCB0aGV5IHR1cm4gaXQgb24gb25seSBm b3IgeW91LCBpbnN0ZWFkIGl0J2xsIGJlIHR1cm5lZCBvbiB3aGVuZXZlciB0aGV5J3JlIGRvbmUg d2l0aCB5b3VyIGFyZWEuDQoNCkkgdGFsa2VkIHRvIHRoZSBsb2NhbCBDb21jYXN0IG9mZmljZSAx LzIgYW4gaG91ciBhZ28uICBUaGV5IHNhaWQgIk5vIElQdjYuICBObyBFVEEgb24gd2hlbiBpdCBt aWdodCBiZSBhdmFpbGFibGUuIg0KDQpJIGNvbW1lbmQgQ29tY2FzdCBvbiB0aGVpciBlZmZvcnRz IGluIGltcGxlbWVudGluZyBJUHY2LiAgIEl0IGlzIGp1c3QgdGhhdCBzb21lIG9mIHdobyBsaXZl IGluIHJ1cmFsIGFyZWFzIHdvdWxkIGxpa2UgaXQgYWxzby4gICBJIGtub3cgaXQgdGFrZXMgYSB3 aGlsZSB0byBnZXQgY292ZXJhZ2UgZXZlcnl3aGVyZSBhbmQgdGhlc2UgYXJlIGJ1c2luZXNzIGRl Y2lzaW9ucy4NCg0KSSB3aWxsIHN0b3AgYnkgdGhlIGxvY2FsIFZlcml6b24gb2ZmaWNlIHRoaXMg YWZ0ZXJub29uIGFuZCBhc2sgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGRvbmdsZSB0aGF0IEpvZWwgc3Bva2Ugb2YuDQoN ClRoYW5rcywNCk5hbGluaQ0K --_000_CF5F343C14D75Ejohnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <5F7584AA0E2AAE45B3373343B61B897D@cable.comcast.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iQ2FsaWJy aSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5OYWxpbmksPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj48Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJDYWxp YnJpLHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxicj4NCjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iQ2Fs aWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5JIHdpbGwgZW1haWwgeW91IHVuaWNhc3QuPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj48Zm9udCBmYWNlPSJDYWxpYnJpLHNhbnMtc2VyaWYiPjxicj4NCjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iQ2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj5Kb2huPC9mb250PjwvZGl2Pg0K PGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNh bnMtc2VyaWY7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMThweDsiPg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICdU aW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj49PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICdU aW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj5Kb2huIEphc29uIEJyem96b3dz a2k8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9u dC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+Q29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZTwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6ICdUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj5tKSA2MDktMzc3 LTY1OTQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsg Zm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+bykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJm b250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbic7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPncpIHd3 dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQ8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3 IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+ZSkmbmJzcDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86am9o bl9icnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tIj5qb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29t Y2FzdC5jb208L2E+PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBS b21hbic7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPj09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6IHJn YigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MThweDsiPg0KPGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8c3BhbiBpZD0iT0xLX1NSQ19CT0RZX1NFQ1RJT04iIHN0 eWxlPSJjb2xvcjogcmdiKDAsIDAsIDApOyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJp ZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxOHB4OyI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJpOyBm b250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjpsZWZ0OyBjb2xvcjpibGFjazsgQk9SREVSLUJPVFRP TTogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1CT1RUT006 IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1MRUZUOiAwaW47IFBBRERJTkctUklHSFQ6IDBpbjsgQk9SREVSLVRPUDog I2I1YzRkZiAxcHQgc29saWQ7IEJPUkRFUi1SSUdIVDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJTkctVE9Q OiAzcHQiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bhbj5OYWxp bmkgRWxraW5zICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFj ay5jb20iPm5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3Bh biBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+UmVwbHktVG86IDwvc3Bhbj5OYWxpbmkgRWxraW5z ICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb20iPm5h bGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+RGF0ZTogPC9zcGFuPk1vbmRheSwgTWFyY2ggMzEsIDIwMTQgYXQg MTM6MzU8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+VG86IDwvc3Bhbj5OYWxp bmkgRWxraW5zICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFj ay5jb20iPm5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPC9hPiZndDssIE1pa2FlbCBB YnJhaGFtc3NvbiAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnN3bWlrZUBzd20ucHAuc2UiPnN3bWlrZUBz d20ucHAuc2U8L2E+Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5DYzog PC9zcGFuPnY2b3BzICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPnY2b3BzQGll dGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWlnaHQ6Ym9sZCI+U3ViamVj dDogPC9zcGFuPlJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQ8YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4N CjxkaXY+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YmxvY2txdW90ZSBpZD0iTUFDX09VVExPT0tfQVRUUklCVVRJ T05fQkxPQ0tRVU9URSIgc3R5bGU9IkJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiAjYjVjNGRmIDUgc29saWQ7IFBBRERJ Tkc6MCAwIDAgNTsgTUFSR0lOOjAgMCAwIDU7Ij4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0i Y29sb3I6IzAwMDsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjojZmZmOyBmb250LWZhbWlseTphcmlhbCwgaGVs dmV0aWNhLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmO2ZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMnB0Ij4NCjxkaXY+VG8gZmluaXNoIG91dCB0 aGlzIHRocmVhZDo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMCwgMCwgMCk7IGZvbnQt c2l6ZTogMTZweDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IGFyaWFsLCBoZWx2ZXRpY2EsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGJh Y2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6IHRyYW5zcGFyZW50OyBmb250LXN0eWxlOiBub3JtYWw7Ij4NCjxicj4N CjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxNnB4 OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogYXJpYWwsIGhlbHZldGljYSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgYmFja2dyb3VuZC1j b2xvcjogdHJhbnNwYXJlbnQ7IGZvbnQtc3R5bGU6IG5vcm1hbDsiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiAndGltZXMgbmV3IHJvbWFuJywgJ25ldyB5b3JrJywgdGltZXMsIHNlcmlmOyBm b250LXNpemU6IDEycHQ7Ij4mZ3Q7V2hlbiBsaXN0ZW5pbmcgdG8gQ29tY2FzdCBzdGFmZiBwcmVz ZW50YXRpb25zIG9uIHRoaXMgaXNzdWUsIGl0IGRpZG4ndCBzZWVtIGxpa2Ugc29tZXRoaW5nIHlv dSBuZWVkIHRvIGFzayBmb3IgYW5kIHRoZXkgdHVybiBpdCBvbiBvbmx5IGZvciB5b3UsIGluc3Rl YWQgaXQnbGwgYmUgdHVybmVkDQogb24gd2hlbmV2ZXIgdGhleSdyZSBkb25lIHdpdGggeW91ciBh cmVhLjwvc3Bhbj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBhcmlhbCwg aGVsdmV0aWNhLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDEycHQ7Ij4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiAndGltZXMgbmV3IHJvbWFuJywgJ25ldyB5b3JrJywgdGltZXMsIHNlcmlmOyBm b250LXNpemU6IDEycHQ7Ij4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9InlfbXNnX2NvbnRhaW5lciI+PGJyPg0KSSB0 YWxrZWQgdG8gdGhlIGxvY2FsIENvbWNhc3Qgb2ZmaWNlIDEvMiBhbiBob3VyIGFnby4gJm5ic3A7 VGhleSBzYWlkICZxdW90O05vIElQdjYuICZuYnNwO05vIEVUQSBvbiB3aGVuIGl0IG1pZ2h0IGJl IGF2YWlsYWJsZS4mcXVvdDs8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9InlfbXNnX2NvbnRhaW5lciI+PGJy Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJ5X21zZ19jb250YWluZXIiPkkgY29tbWVuZCBDb21jYXN0 IG9uIHRoZWlyIGVmZm9ydHMgaW4gaW1wbGVtZW50aW5nIElQdjYuICZuYnNwOyBJdCBpcyBqdXN0 IHRoYXQgc29tZSBvZiB3aG8gbGl2ZSBpbiBydXJhbCBhcmVhcyB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIGl0IGFsc28u ICZuYnNwOyBJIGtub3cgaXQgdGFrZXMgYSB3aGlsZSB0byBnZXQgY292ZXJhZ2UgZXZlcnl3aGVy ZSBhbmQgdGhlc2UgYXJlIGJ1c2luZXNzIGRlY2lzaW9ucy48L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9Inlf bXNnX2NvbnRhaW5lciI+PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNzPSJ5X21zZ19jb250YWluZXIi Pkkgd2lsbCBzdG9wIGJ5IHRoZSBsb2NhbCBWZXJpem9uIG9mZmljZSB0aGlzIGFmdGVybm9vbiBh bmQgYXNrIGFib3V0IHRoZSBkb25nbGUgdGhhdCBKb2VsIHNwb2tlIG9mLjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBj bGFzcz0ieV9tc2dfY29udGFpbmVyIj48YnI+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9InlfbXNnX2Nv bnRhaW5lciI+VGhhbmtzLDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0ieV9tc2dfY29udGFpbmVyIj5OYWxp bmk8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Jsb2Nr cXVvdGU+DQo8L3NwYW4+DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_CF5F343C14D75Ejohnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 12:26:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A461A08BE; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:26:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YlQe8VLW-8s7; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:26:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B35C1A6F8B; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:26:39 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 5.2.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20140331192639.5619.81543.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:26:39 -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/49ruyX1iVIwwF1PRuSN3SQBg3WU Cc: v6ops mailing list , v6ops chair , RFC Editor Subject: [v6ops] Document Action: 'NAT64 Deployment Options and Experience' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10.txt) X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:26:47 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'NAT64 Deployment Options and Experience' (draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience-10.txt) as Informational RFC This document is the product of the IPv6 Operations Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Joel Jaeggli and Benoit Claise. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-experience/ Technical Summary This document summarizes NAT64 function deployment scenarios and operational experience. Both NAT64 Carrier Grade NAT (NAT64-CGN) and NAT64 server Front End (NAT64-FE) are considered in this document. Working Group Summary The original discussion is derived from the presentation of http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/82/slides/v6ops-5.pdf. Afterwards, it was documented as draft-chen-v6ops-nat64-experience in Feb 2012. The working group document is a report developed by several operators on the use of a NAT64 between an IPv6-only mobile network and the larger IPv4-only network. The draft has been discussed at length and in detail. There are some operators in the working group that have a problem with it because it openly discusses the use of RFC 6052/6144-6147 IPv4/IPv6 translation and RFC 4193 ULAs; they hold the viewpoint that translation and the use of non-global address space is philosophically and operationally problematic. For example, a matter dealt with in the draft in response to working group discussion, it often sacrifices geolocation information that is important to certain types of services. The authors of the draft also point out that running a dual stack mobile network is expensive for reasons specific to mobile networks, and view the trade-offs as acceptable given the economics. Document Quality As specified in the abstract, the document is not a protocol or procedure; it is a report of operational deployment and testing of a NAT64 service between an IPv6-only mobile network and the larger IPv4 Internet as well as a NAT64 service in an IDC environment. This testing includes the use of NAT64 CGN and NAT64 FE, its coexistence with more traditional NAT44, Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability issues, the transparency or lack of it regarding source addresses, Quality of Experience, MTU issues, and ULA-related issues. Personnel The document shepherd is Fred Baker. The responsible AD is Joel Jaegli. From nobody Mon Mar 31 12:55:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B561A6F78 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:55:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.189 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.189 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 27kuABFL986X for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.z120.zixworks.com (mx.z120.zixworks.com [199.30.235.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 700FA1A6FBC for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 12:55:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) by Outbound.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id A79EB110D00 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:23 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva2.bcbsm.com (unknown [12.107.172.81]) by mx.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id F1363134769; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:55:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva2.bcbsm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA80 (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA242F0043; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:38:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA110.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (unknown [10.64.80.218]) by imsva2.bcbsm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE9B2F0040; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:38:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::fdcb:603d:469e:b1db]) by PWN401EA110.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::716f:e3f0:b97f:8900%13]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:55:20 -0400 From: "Ackermann, Michael" To: "Brzozowski, John" , Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPRSXNBdbDDM5GBUyCYXCSZI+Y2ZrsFbiAgA69PICAAAkXgIAAh2kAgAAqsoCAAAVhAIAABKKA///BHtCAAATJQIAAgDIA///KcxA= Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:55:20 +0000 Message-ID: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.10.35] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595PWN401EA160entc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-VPM-HOST: vmvpm01.z120.zixworks.com X-VPM-GROUP-ID: 7028f3cd-a696-4583-9b2c-4e8e0f5cb35f X-VPM-MSG-ID: 818362eb-da12-4870-a40e-6c41d35d8b30 X-VPM-ENC-REGIME: Plaintext X-VPM-CERT-FLAG: 0 X-VPM-IS-HYBRID: 0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/wxzQQiSUE9r8mz2jJ4oaMzqIAgs Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 19:55:31 -0000 --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 VGhhbmtzIEpvaG4NCg0KSSB3b3VsZCBiZSBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIHdoZW4gQ29tY2FzdCB3 aWxsIGhhdmUgSVBWNiBpbiA0ODA4MywgNDg4NTggYW5kIDQ4MjI2LiAgIEFsbCBhcmUgaW4g TWljaGlnYW4uICAgIEkgY2Fubm90IHNlZW0gdG8gZ2V0IGFuIGVzdGltYXRlIG9uIHRoaXMg dGhyb3VnaCBjb252ZW50aW9uYWwgbWVjaGFuaXNtcywgc28gYW55IGluZm8geW91IG1pZ2h0 IGhhdmUgd291bGQgYmUgZ3JlYXRseSBhcHByZWNpYXRlZC4NCg0KVGhhbmtzDQoNCk1pa2UN Cg0KDQoNCkZyb206IEJyem96b3dza2ksIEpvaG4gW21haWx0bzpKb2huX0Jyem96b3dza2lA Q2FibGUuQ29tY2FzdC5jb21dDQpTZW50OiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IDI6NTUg UE0NClRvOiBBY2tlcm1hbm4sIE1pY2hhZWw7IE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnM7IE1pa2FlbCBBYnJh aGFtc3Nvbg0KQ2M6IElQdjYgT3BlcmF0aW9ucw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFj ZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KDQpQZW9wbGUgd2hvIGFyZSBDb21jYXN0IGN1c3RvbWVy cyB0aGF0IGRvIG5vdCBoYXZlIElQdjYgY2FuIGNvbnRhY3QgbWUgb2ZmbGluZSBvciB1bmlj YXN0IHZpYSBlbWFpbC4NCg0KVG8gZGF0ZSB3ZSBoYXZlIGxhdW5jaGVkIHJlc2lkZW50aWFs IGJyb2FkYmFuZCBzdXBwb3J0IGZvciBuYXRpdmUgSVB2Ni4gIENvbW1lcmNpYWwgRE9DU0lT IElQdjYgc3VwcG9ydCBpcyBpbiBwbGFubmluZyBhbmQgd2lsbCBiZSBsYXVuY2hlZCBzb29u IGhvcGVmdWxseSBiZWZvcmUgdGhlIHN1bW1lciB0aW1lLg0KDQpKb2huDQo9PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KSm9obiBKYXNvbiBCcnpvem93c2tp DQpDb21jYXN0IENhYmxlDQptKSA2MDktMzc3LTY1OTQNCm8pIDQ4NC05NjItMDA2MA0Kdykg d3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldDxodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldD4NCmUpIGpvaG5fYnJ6 b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbTxtYWlsdG86am9obl9icnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxl LmNvbWNhc3QuY29tPg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT0NCg0KRnJvbTogPEFja2VybWFubj4sIE1pa2UgQWNrZXJtYW5uIDxtYWNrZXJtYW5uQGJj YnNtLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogTW9uZGF5LCBN YXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxMToxNw0KVG86IE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgPG5hbGluaS5lbGtp bnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPG1haWx0bzpuYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0 YWNrLmNvbT4+LCBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gPHN3bWlrZUBzd20ucHAuc2U8bWFpbHRv OnN3bWlrZUBzd20ucHAuc2U+Pg0KQ2M6IHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZzxtYWlsdG86 djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmc+Pg0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVw bG95bWVudA0KDQpTYW1lIGhlcmUgaW4gTWljaGlnYW4uICAgIEkgdHJpZWQgdG8gZ2V0IElQ VjYgb24gQ29tY2FzdCBhbmQgaXQgaXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgMyBhcmVhcyBJ IHRyaWVkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgc3RhdGUgb2YgTUkuDQoNCg0KDQpGcm9tOiB2Nm9wcyBbbWFp bHRvOnY2b3BzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmddIE9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5z DQpTZW50OiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IDEwOjU5IEFNDQpUbzogTWlrYWVsIEFi cmFoYW1zc29uDQpDYzogSVB2NiBPcGVyYXRpb25zDQpTdWJqZWN0OiBSZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBG YWNlYm9vayB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50DQoNCg0KPj4gVGhlIElTUCB0byBteSBob21lIGlzIENv bWNhc3QuICBKdXN0IHNheWluZy4gIFNlZW1zIGRvdWJ0ZnVsIHRoYXQgdGhleSB3aWxsIGdv IHVuZGVyIHNpbmNlIHRoZXkgc2VlbSB0byBoYXZlIGEgbmVhciBtb25vcG9seSBpbiB0aGUg VVMuDQoNCj5Db21jYXN0IGlzIGRvaW5nIElQdjYgb24gYSB3aWRlIHNjYWxlLiBodHRwOi8v d3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldC8NCg0KPkFzIGZhciBhcyBJIGNhbiB0ZWxsLCB0aGV5IG5vdyBo YXZlIHRoZSBsYXJnZXN0IElQdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudCBpbiB0aGUgd29ybGQuDQoNCkd1eXMs DQoNCkNvbWNhc3QgaXMgaW5kZWVkIGRvaW5nIElQdjYgYnV0IGl0IHNlZW1zIHRvIGRlcGVu ZCBvbiBob3cgY2xvc2UgeW91IGFyZSB0byBhIG1ham9yIHVyYmFuIGNlbnRlci4gICBJIGhh dmUgYXNrZWQgYmVmb3JlIGFuZCB3YXMgdG9sZCB0aGF0IGl0IHdhcyBub3QgYXZhaWxhYmxl IGluIG15IGFyZWEuICBCVFcsICBJICBkbyBub3QgbGl2ZSBDT01QTEVURUxZIGluIHRoZSBt aWRkbGUgb2Ygbm93aGVyZS4gICBKdXN0IHdoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4gYWN0dWFsbHkgYmUgc3Vy cm91bmRlZCBieSB0cmVlcyBhbmQgY2xlYW4gYWlyLg0KDQpUaGUgbG9jYWwgb2ZmaWNlIG9w ZW5zIGF0IDk6MDBhbSBteSB0aW1lLiAgKGFib3V0IGFuIGhvdXIpLiAgSSB3aWxsIGFzayBh Z2FpbiAobmljZWx5ISkgYW5kIHBvc3QgdGhlIHJlc3VsdHMgb2Ygd2hhdCBJIGdldC4gIEkg aG9wZSB0byBzdGFuZCBjb3JyZWN0ZWQuDQoNCk5hbGluaQ0KDQoNCg0KDQpUaGUgaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGluIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBoaWdobHkgY29uZmlk ZW50aWFsIGFuZCBpcyBpbnRlbmRlZCBzb2xlbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2 aWR1YWwocykgdG8gd2hvbSB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgZGlyZWN0ZWQuIElmIHlv dSBhcmUgbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQsIHlvdSBhcmUgaGVyZWJ5IG5vdGlm aWVkIHRoYXQgYW55IHZpZXdpbmcsIGNvcHlpbmcsIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgb3IgZGlzdHJpYnV0 aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gUGxlYXNlIG5vdGlmeSB0 aGUgc2VuZGVyLCBieSBlbGVjdHJvbmljIG1haWwgb3IgdGVsZXBob25lLCBvZiBhbnkgdW5p bnRlbmRlZCByZWNlaXB0IGFuZCBkZWxldGUgdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aG91 dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGNvcGllcy4NCg0KQmx1ZSBDcm9zcyBCbHVlIFNoaWVsZCBvZiBNaWNo aWdhbiBhbmQgQmx1ZSBDYXJlIE5ldHdvcmsgb2YgTWljaGlnYW4gYXJlIG5vbnByb2ZpdCBj b3Jwb3JhdGlvbnMgYW5kIGluZGVwZW5kZW50IGxpY2Vuc2VlcyBvZiB0aGUgQmx1ZSBDcm9z cyBhbmQgQmx1ZSBTaGllbGQgQXNzb2NpYXRpb24uDQoKClRoZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250 YWluZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGlzIGhpZ2hseSBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgYW5k IGlzIGludGVuZGVkIHNvbGVseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbChzKSB0 byB3aG9tIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBkaXJlY3RlZC4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3Qg dGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCwgeW91IGFyZSBoZXJlYnkgbm90aWZpZWQgdGhhdCBh bnkgdmlld2luZywgY29weWluZywgZGlzY2xvc3VyZSBvciBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24gb2YgdGhp cyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBQbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5IHRoZSBzZW5kZXIs IGJ5IGVsZWN0cm9uaWMgbWFpbCBvciB0ZWxlcGhvbmUsIG9mIGFueSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJl Y2VpcHQgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgbWVzc2FnZSB3aXRob3V0IG1ha2luZyBh bnkgY29waWVzLgogCiBCbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFuZCBC bHVlIENhcmUgTmV0d29yayBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhcmUgbm9ucHJvZml0IGNvcnBvcmF0aW9u cyBhbmQgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgbGljZW5zZWVzIG9mIHRoZSBCbHVlIENyb3NzIGFuZCBCbHVl IFNoaWVsZCBBc3NvY2lhdGlvbi4K --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6dj0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTp2bWwiIHhtbG5zOm89 InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206b2ZmaWNlOm9mZmljZSIgeG1sbnM6dz0idXJu OnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6d29yZCIgeG1sbnM6bT0iaHR0cDovL3Nj aGVtYXMubWljcm9zb2Z0LmNvbS9vZmZpY2UvMjAwNC8xMi9vbW1sIiB4bWxucz0iaHR0cDov L3d3dy53My5vcmcvVFIvUkVDLWh0bWw0MCI+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9 IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0idGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjxt ZXRhIG5hbWU9IkdlbmVyYXRvciIgY29udGVudD0iTWljcm9zb2Z0IFdvcmQgMTIgKGZpbHRl cmVkIG1lZGl1bSkiPg0KPHN0eWxlPjwhLS0NCi8qIEZvbnQgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBm b250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbWJyaWEgTWF0aCI7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiA0 IDUgMyA1IDQgNiAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OkNhbGlicmk7 DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiAxNSA1IDIgMiAyIDQgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250 LWZhbWlseTpUYWhvbWE7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6MiAxMSA2IDQgMyA1IDQgNCAyIDQ7fQ0KLyog U3R5bGUgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCnAuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBsaS5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGRpdi5N c29Ob3JtYWwNCgl7bWFyZ2luOjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOi4wMDAxcHQ7DQoJZm9u dC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuIiwic2VyaWYi O30NCmE6bGluaywgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmsNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5 Ow0KCWNvbG9yOmJsdWU7DQoJdGV4dC1kZWNvcmF0aW9uOnVuZGVybGluZTt9DQphOnZpc2l0 ZWQsIHNwYW4uTXNvSHlwZXJsaW5rRm9sbG93ZWQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5 Ow0KCWNvbG9yOnB1cnBsZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRlY29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCnANCgl7 bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCW1zby1tYXJnaW4tdG9wLWFsdDphdXRvOw0KCW1h cmdpbi1yaWdodDowaW47DQoJbXNvLW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b20tYWx0OmF1dG87DQoJbWFyZ2lu LWxlZnQ6MGluOw0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IlRpbWVzIE5l dyBSb21hbiIsInNlcmlmIjt9DQpwLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGxpLk1zb0FjZXRhdGUsIGRpdi5N c29BY2V0YXRlDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUtbGluazoi QmFsbG9vbiBUZXh0IENoYXIiOw0KCW1hcmdpbjowaW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAw MXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZTo4LjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1z ZXJpZiI7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWw7 DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdE O30NCnNwYW4uRW1haWxTdHlsZTE5DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBlcnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5 Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7DQoJY29sb3I6IzFGNDk3 RDt9DQpzcGFuLkJhbGxvb25UZXh0Q2hhcg0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtbmFtZToiQmFsbG9vbiBU ZXh0IENoYXIiOw0KCW1zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCgltc28tc3R5bGUtbGluazoi QmFsbG9vbiBUZXh0IjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiVGFob21hIiwic2Fucy1zZXJpZiI7fQ0K Lk1zb0NocERlZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9ubHk7DQoJZm9udC1z aXplOjEwLjBwdDt9DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVpbiAxMS4waW47 DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEN Cgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjE7fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+ PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBlZGVmYXVsdHMgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiIHNwaWRtYXg9IjEwMjYiIC8+ DQo8L3htbD48IVtlbmRpZl0tLT48IS0tW2lmIGd0ZSBtc28gOV0+PHhtbD4NCjxvOnNoYXBl bGF5b3V0IHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0Ij4NCjxvOmlkbWFwIHY6ZXh0PSJlZGl0IiBkYXRhPSIxIiAv Pg0KPC9vOnNoYXBlbGF5b3V0PjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0KPGJvZHkg bGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIGxpbms9ImJsdWUiIHZsaW5rPSJwdXJwbGUiPg0KPGRpdiBjbGFzcz0i V29yZFNlY3Rpb24xIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5UaGFua3MgSm9objxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9z cGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJp ZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250 LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29s b3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+SSB3b3VsZCBiZSBpbnRlcmVzdGVkIGluIHdoZW4gQ29tY2FzdCB3aWxs IGhhdmUgSVBWNiBpbiA0ODA4MywgNDg4NTggYW5kIDQ4MjI2LiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBBbGwg YXJlIGluIE1pY2hpZ2FuLiZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyZuYnNwOyBJIGNhbm5vdCBzZWVtIHRvIGdl dCBhbiBlc3RpbWF0ZSBvbiB0aGlzIHRocm91Z2ggY29udmVudGlvbmFsDQogbWVjaGFuaXNt cywgc28gYW55IGluZm8geW91IG1pZ2h0IGhhdmUgd291bGQgYmUgZ3JlYXRseSBhcHByZWNp YXRlZC4gPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZx dW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7 PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJm b250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7 c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5UaGFua3M8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bh bj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEx LjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYm cXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1m YW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9y OiMxRjQ5N0QiPk1pa2U8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9y bWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtD YWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+PG86 cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4g c3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90 OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48 L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLXRvcDpzb2xpZCAj QjVDNERGIDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6My4wcHQgMGluIDBpbiAwaW4iPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6 JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDsiPkZyb206PC9zcGFu PjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtU YWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90OyI+IEJyem96b3dza2ksIEpvaG4g W21haWx0bzpKb2huX0Jyem96b3dza2lAQ2FibGUuQ29tY2FzdC5jb21dDQo8YnI+DQo8Yj5T ZW50OjwvYj4gTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCAyOjU1IFBNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9i PiBBY2tlcm1hbm4sIE1pY2hhZWw7IE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnM7IE1pa2FlbCBBYnJhaGFtc3Nv bjxicj4NCjxiPkNjOjwvYj4gSVB2NiBPcGVyYXRpb25zPGJyPg0KPGI+U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+ IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQ8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48 L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8 L286cD48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEzLjVwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJp JnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPlBlb3BsZSB3aG8g YXJlIENvbWNhc3QgY3VzdG9tZXJzIHRoYXQgZG8gbm90IGhhdmUgSVB2NiBjYW4gY29udGFj dCBtZSBvZmZsaW5lIG9yIHVuaWNhc3QgdmlhIGVtYWlsLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJm b250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7 c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVv dDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5UbyBkYXRlIHdlIGhhdmUgbGF1bmNo ZWQgcmVzaWRlbnRpYWwgYnJvYWRiYW5kIHN1cHBvcnQgZm9yIG5hdGl2ZSBJUHY2LiAmbmJz cDtDb21tZXJjaWFsIERPQ1NJUyBJUHY2IHN1cHBvcnQgaXMgaW4gcGxhbm5pbmcgYW5kIHdp bGwgYmUgbGF1bmNoZWQgc29vbiBob3BlZnVsbHkgYmVmb3JlDQogdGhlIHN1bW1lciB0aW1l LjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29O b3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90 O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86 cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1 b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5K b2huPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2NvbG9yOmJs YWNrIj49PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PTxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5Kb2huIEphc29uIEJy em96b3dza2k8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFz cz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEzLjVwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFj ayI+Q29tY2FzdCBDYWJsZTxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2Nv bG9yOmJsYWNrIj5tKSA2MDktMzc3LTY1OTQ8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXpl OjEzLjVwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+bykgNDg0LTk2Mi0wMDYwPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPncpIDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cu Y29tY2FzdDYubmV0Ij4NCnd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQ8L2E+PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPmUpJm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRv OmpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbSI+am9obl9icnpvem93c2tpQGNh YmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tPC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRp dj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0 O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj49PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PTxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6 MTMuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJp ZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJib3JkZXI6bm9uZTtib3JkZXItdG9wOnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYg MS4wcHQ7cGFkZGluZzozLjBwdCAwaW4gMGluIDBpbiI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48Yj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtD YWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkZyb206 DQo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFj ayI+Jmx0O0Fja2VybWFubiZndDssIE1pa2UgQWNrZXJtYW5uICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWls dG86bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb20iPm1hY2tlcm1hbm5AYmNic20uY29tPC9hPiZndDs8 YnI+DQo8Yj5EYXRlOiA8L2I+TW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxMToxNzxicj4N CjxiPlRvOiA8L2I+TmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm5hbGluaS5l bGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tIj5uYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNr LmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7LCBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpz d21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlIj5zd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5DYzog PC9iPnY2b3BzICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPnY2b3BzQGll dGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5TdWJqZWN0OiA8L2I+UmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJv b2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2Zv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8Ymxv Y2txdW90ZSBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLWxlZnQ6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiA0 LjVwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjBpbiAwaW4gMGluIDQuMHB0O21hcmdpbi1sZWZ0OjMuNzVwdDttYXJn aW4tcmlnaHQ6MGluIiBpZD0iTUFDX09VVExPT0tfQVRUUklCVVRJT05fQkxPQ0tRVU9URSI+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj5TYW1lIGhlcmUgaW4gTWljaGlnYW4uJm5i c3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IEkgdHJpZWQgdG8gZ2V0IElQVjYgb24gQ29tY2FzdCBhbmQgaXQg aXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgMyBhcmVhcyBJIHRyaWVkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgc3Rh dGUgb2YgTUkuDQo8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpw Pjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOjExLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtDYWxpYnJpJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMt c2VyaWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6IzFGNDk3RCI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2Fs aWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0QiPiZuYnNw Ozwvc3Bhbj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2siPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0 O2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90 Oztjb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEIj4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNr Ij48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5v bmU7Ym9yZGVyLXRvcDpzb2xpZCAjQjVDNERGIDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6My4wcHQgMGluIDBp biAwaW4iPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7VGFob21hJnF1b3Q7LCZxdW90O3NhbnMtc2Vy aWYmcXVvdDs7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkZyb206PC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDtmb250LWZhbWlseTomcXVvdDtUYWhvbWEmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fu cy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+IHY2b3BzIFs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86djZv cHMtYm91bmNlc0BpZXRmLm9yZyI+bWFpbHRvOnY2b3BzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmc8L2E+ XQ0KPGI+T24gQmVoYWxmIE9mIDwvYj5OYWxpbmkgRWxraW5zPGJyPg0KPGI+U2VudDo8L2I+ IE1vbmRheSwgTWFyY2ggMzEsIDIwMTQgMTA6NTkgQU08YnI+DQo8Yj5Ubzo8L2I+IE1pa2Fl bCBBYnJhaGFtc3Nvbjxicj4NCjxiPkNjOjwvYj4gSVB2NiBPcGVyYXRpb25zPGJyPg0KPGI+ U3ViamVjdDo8L2I+IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQ8L3NwYW4+ PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJs YWNrIj4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7QXJpYWwmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztj b2xvcjpibGFjayI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86 cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBUaGUgSVNQIHRvIG15IGhvbWUgaXMgQ29tY2FzdC4g Jm5ic3A7SnVzdCBzYXlpbmcuICZuYnNwO1NlZW1zIGRvdWJ0ZnVsIHRoYXQgdGhleSB3aWxs IGdvIHVuZGVyIHNpbmNlIHRoZXkgc2VlbSB0byBoYXZlIGEgbmVhciBtb25vcG9seSBpbiB0 aGUgVVMuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJmd0O0NvbWNhc3QgaXMgZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBvbiBhIHdpZGUg c2NhbGUuIDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0LyI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5j b21jYXN0Ni5uZXQvPC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZndDtBcyBmYXIgYXMgSSBjYW4gdGVsbCwg dGhleSBub3cgaGF2ZSB0aGUgbGFyZ2VzdCBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaW4gdGhlIHdvcmxk LjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29O b3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6Ymxh Y2siPiZuYnNwOzxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkd1eXMsJm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUi PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9w Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91 bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Q29tY2FzdCBpcyBpbmRlZWQg ZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBidXQgaXQgc2VlbXMgdG8gZGVwZW5kIG9uIGhvdyBjbG9zZSB5b3UgYXJl IHRvIGEgbWFqb3IgdXJiYW4gY2VudGVyLiAmbmJzcDsgSSBoYXZlIGFza2VkIGJlZm9yZSBh bmQgd2FzIHRvbGQgdGhhdCBpdCB3YXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiBteSBhcmVhLiAmbmJz cDtCVFcsICZuYnNwO0kgJm5ic3A7ZG8gbm90DQogbGl2ZSBDT01QTEVURUxZIGluIHRoZSBt aWRkbGUgb2Ygbm93aGVyZS4gJm5ic3A7IEp1c3Qgd2hlcmUgeW91IGNhbiBhY3R1YWxseSBi ZSBzdXJyb3VuZGVkIGJ5IHRyZWVzIGFuZCBjbGVhbiBhaXIuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+ PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tn cm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286 cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5 bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+VGhlIGxv Y2FsIG9mZmljZSBvcGVucyBhdCA5OjAwYW0gbXkgdGltZS4gJm5ic3A7KGFib3V0IGFuIGhv dXIpLiAmbmJzcDtJIHdpbGwgYXNrIGFnYWluIChuaWNlbHkhKSBhbmQgcG9zdCB0aGUgcmVz dWx0cyBvZiB3aGF0IEkgZ2V0LiAmbmJzcDtJIGhvcGUgdG8gc3RhbmQgY29ycmVjdGVkLiAm bmJzcDsmbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mbmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNw YW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5OYWxpbmk8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQombmJzcDs8bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2ZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiZxdW90O0NhbGlicmkmcXVvdDssJnF1b3Q7c2Fucy1zZXJpZiZxdW90Oztjb2xvcjpi bGFjayI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHA+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZv bnQtc2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtz YW5zLXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5UaGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVk IGluIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBoaWdobHkgY29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGFuZCBpcyBp bnRlbmRlZCBzb2xlbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwocykgdG8gd2hv bSB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgZGlyZWN0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBhcmUNCiBub3QgdGhl IGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCwgeW91IGFyZSBoZXJlYnkgbm90aWZpZWQgdGhhdCBhbnkg dmlld2luZywgY29weWluZywgZGlzY2xvc3VyZSBvciBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24gb2YgdGhpcyBp bmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBQbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5IHRoZSBzZW5kZXIsIGJ5 IGVsZWN0cm9uaWMgbWFpbCBvciB0ZWxlcGhvbmUsIG9mIGFueSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2Vp cHQgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgbWVzc2FnZQ0KIHdpdGhvdXQgbWFraW5nIGFu eSBjb3BpZXMuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHA+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt c2l6ZToxMy41cHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q2FsaWJyaSZxdW90OywmcXVvdDtzYW5z LXNlcmlmJnF1b3Q7O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5CbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIG9mIE1p Y2hpZ2FuIGFuZCBCbHVlIENhcmUgTmV0d29yayBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhcmUgbm9ucHJvZml0 IGNvcnBvcmF0aW9ucyBhbmQgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgbGljZW5zZWVzIG9mIHRoZSBCbHVlIENy b3NzIGFuZCBCbHVlIFNoaWVsZCBBc3NvY2lhdGlvbi48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0 bWw+DQoKCjxCUj4KPGh0bWw+CiA8cD5UaGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGluIHRo aXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBoaWdobHkgY29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGFuZCBpcyBpbnRlbmRl ZCBzb2xlbHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwocykgdG8gd2hvbSB0aGlz IGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgZGlyZWN0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRl ZCByZWNpcGllbnQsIHlvdSBhcmUgaGVyZWJ5IG5vdGlmaWVkIHRoYXQgYW55IHZpZXdpbmcs IGNvcHlpbmcsIGRpc2Nsb3N1cmUgb3IgZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uIG9mIHRoaXMgaW5mb3JtYXRp b24gaXMgcHJvaGliaXRlZC4gUGxlYXNlIG5vdGlmeSB0aGUgc2VuZGVyLCBieSBlbGVjdHJv bmljIG1haWwgb3IgdGVsZXBob25lLCBvZiBhbnkgdW5pbnRlbmRlZCByZWNlaXB0IGFuZCBk ZWxldGUgdGhlIG9yaWdpbmFsIG1lc3NhZ2Ugd2l0aG91dCBtYWtpbmcgYW55IGNvcGllcy48 L3A+CiA8cD5CbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFuZCBCbHVlIENh cmUgTmV0d29yayBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhcmUgbm9ucHJvZml0IGNvcnBvcmF0aW9ucyBhbmQg aW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgbGljZW5zZWVzIG9mIHRoZSBCbHVlIENyb3NzIGFuZCBCbHVlIFNoaWVs ZCBBc3NvY2lhdGlvbi48L3A+CiAgPC9odG1sPgoK --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595PWN401EA160entc_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:03:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18EB21A08C3 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A8-4GkAWspVx for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pb0-x234.google.com (mail-pb0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::234]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9ECE1A08BE for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id rr13so8748999pbb.11 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aE/rXp3gwtF7/JyA8faR8EV+6fkiLPLuOWnZ/rNBXM8=; b=QiNgyDtgSOpjZcOUrAM3et9MoS6WA9lDFaf/0hOcsicwMr47FpvDGDMn39Dp+bUizk VrP+eRJHE+3LKXJY/Ps/SMRNe4tIARCYxEqL37KadRdNXSEqAM+HYkmpBclNrguTkwAQ ymYcIA6yPPTp4eo6R6mubsG8vlVtHgfaS4e+TDL4WH5KU0n6jV8y30FFKKvHIWU9upW1 X2GwizjsOUZOVoqoJB6TNozY2f6px3hxmCApeNXiuyK9xUZViwm7Y/02PbuBtP61CG7I D63Mv0zEribbwBYRLKrOwQ0k3iHFPe43G4nvePeb0NC79WHzcPpazs6I9EOeDUp1TgLU ElXg== X-Received: by 10.68.139.2 with SMTP id qu2mr5170196pbb.164.1396296205658; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.23] (60.195.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.195.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ps1sm44897997pac.26.2014.03.31.13.03.22 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5339CA07.5060104@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 09:03:19 +1300 From: Brian E Carpenter Organization: University of Auckland User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ackermann, Michael" References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/w9FNbihV-3DcOJC0vyT0zh_HUuQ Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:03:31 -0000 Would whoever completely changed the subject of this thread please hop into their time machine, go back, and change the Subject to "Comcast IPv6" or something like that? Regards Brian On 01/04/2014 08:55, Ackermann, Michael wrote: > Thanks John > > I would be interested in when Comcast will have IPV6 in 48083, 48858 and 48226. All are in Michigan. I cannot seem to get an estimate on this through conventional mechanisms, so any info you might have would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks > > Mike > > > > From: Brzozowski, John [mailto:John_Brzozowski@Cable.Comcast.com] > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 2:55 PM > To: Ackermann, Michael; Nalini Elkins; Mikael Abrahamsson > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment > > People who are Comcast customers that do not have IPv6 can contact me offline or unicast via email. > > To date we have launched residential broadband support for native IPv6. Commercial DOCSIS IPv6 support is in planning and will be launched soon hopefully before the summer time. > > John > ========================================= > John Jason Brzozowski > Comcast Cable > m) 609-377-6594 > o) 484-962-0060 > w) www.comcast6.net > e) john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com > ========================================= > > From: , Mike Ackermann > > Date: Monday, March 31, 2014 at 11:17 > To: Nalini Elkins >, Mikael Abrahamsson > > Cc: v6ops > > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment > > Same here in Michigan. I tried to get IPV6 on Comcast and it is not available in the 3 areas I tried within the state of MI. > > > > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Nalini Elkins > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 10:59 AM > To: Mikael Abrahamsson > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment > > >>> The ISP to my home is Comcast. Just saying. Seems doubtful that they will go under since they seem to have a near monopoly in the US. > >> Comcast is doing IPv6 on a wide scale. http://www.comcast6.net/ > >> As far as I can tell, they now have the largest IPv6 deployment in the world. > > Guys, > > Comcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you are to a major urban center. I have asked before and was told that it was not available in my area. BTW, I do not live COMPLETELY in the middle of nowhere. Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees and clean air. > > The local office opens at 9:00am my time. (about an hour). I will ask again (nicely!) and post the results of what I get. I hope to stand corrected. > > Nalini > > > > > The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original message without making any copies. > > Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association. > > > The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original message without making any copies. > > Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:14:39 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 619331A6F98 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:14:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ayxK9ngXUQXk for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:14:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 763A11A6FA9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:14:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.51.175] ([12.12.222.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2VK8OFV005972 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:08:25 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2VK8OFV005972 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396296506; bh=0hLmWoNnx9YX6hOgkSsTJNRdAKg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=Do+hRR9vMVtPuJkGxNshkSUXXT3oTEQ2XQAhnc9BDwZ7CmtJEL8moDM075F0WM4Uo 7XHlnm0rLDN2Z/pH7HFNfL/wg/vRnZiI2W8vcGMdXWfgvHkASwiLxc8XJLFy8OOPGP hCusXuAv/e2RV8H10e5XESVxBRjhb6vQKhT78+iI= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:08:22 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <4B3B60DC-E955-4CE8-83ED-C60992423144@delong.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Nalini Elkins X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/crjVyaJMQZIv1etx821Ch62Q1sw Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:14:34 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 7:08 AM, Nalini Elkins = wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: >> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration >> towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until = IPv6 >> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead >> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. >=20 >> The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. >=20 > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just starting = to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not even in = their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. Then they are major corporations asleep at the switch which are on the = verge of getting a rude awakening. This isn=92t really unusual for major = US corporations, there=92s a long tradition including GM (Japanese = cars), IBM (personal computing), Enron (market adjustments and creative = accounting practices), and many many more. However, anyone who hasn=92t started deploying IPv6 shouldn=92t be = looking at a tunneled solution to doing so at this point, they should go = straight to native dual stack. There=92s really no remaining reason to = do tunneled. Just because the corporations haven=92t advanced doesn=92t = mean that the hardware and software was standing still while they were = sleeping. > At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP or = ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money. When our engineers do = IPv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 tunneling. Most of California can get native IPv6 from Comcast at no additional = charge. While DSL remains the one place where 6rd (tunneled) is more = common than native, there=92s little advantage to worrying about that = from the QoS perspective proposed by Mohammad. > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. The conversation is based in reality. The reality in Carmel Valley is = _NOT_ the reality in much of the world. Owen From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:18:32 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00CE81A6FE9 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:18:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5dIT8b0dnb-x for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6B031A6FEA for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.51.175] ([12.12.222.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2VKH7Fj007841 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:17:08 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2VKH7Fj007841 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396297029; bh=pNMu330I7uQ0GrFjrstmSB3mapg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=CdotjaPHbmR1Qb3UdYxbHzKu4AVpyBEJPbkc6lwkLjcD1M/EAXbIR10XeWowzn8D0 esB3dEoZC9AUbDIQyzmaf1w0HOXnThyjyzmK17sJHbtgMJG6ZZQXcNQWmJW7nG0em2 CiDa5kpkiA4dx1UqVNrSOfGJDEWXhjX9Z0vmK4LQ= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:17:06 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7C10383F-6E05-4FF5-BBEF-CADCC8824CCF@delong.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Mikael Abrahamsson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/2SEaqRGE4td1YzQmubnJj5SW-P4 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:18:29 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:03 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson = wrote: > On Mon, 31 Mar 2014, Nalini Elkins wrote: >=20 >> Comcast is indeed doing IPv6 but it seems to depend on how close you = are to a major urban center. I have asked before and was told that it = was not available in my area. BTW, I do not live COMPLETELY in the = middle of nowhere. Just where you can actually be surrounded by trees = and clean air. >>=20 >> The local office opens at 9:00am my time. (about an hour). I will = ask again (nicely!) and post the results of what I get. I hope to stand = corrected. =20 >=20 > When listening to Comcast staff presentations on this issue, it didn't = seem like something you need to ask for and they turn it on only for = you, instead it'll be turned on whenever they're done with your area. Yes and no. If your equipment is old, you might have to ask for them to swap it out = to give you something IPv6 capable. Owen From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:29:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D87401A6F8A for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:29:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wcGzFA85d1j7 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:29:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E48B1A6F85 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.51.175] ([12.12.222.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2VKQTd4009555 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:26:31 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2VKQTd4009555 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396297591; bh=fn0r+X7Q1FbWaVuGXaFdHLno9kw=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=SXIEpWX68nMQ2+w/cR176qa/GTLDR/yn3kckbrh5nCmmmAA6COo761Hpdj2+gkpaE wmafgPA/PC2sQXC+7xpiuPVqIPT8JRhfBear0bGWd1zz/E9gQp8ZyjnDLb2S7dJerY 2YE6aFiicR+PZKzxpCAptx9BiO3afBVGwBOQjsDM= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_937481E7-2918-4175-8399-B3A2F16A5FC6" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:26:28 -0700 Message-Id: <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Bill Jouris X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/ygSv1X-cPY2XzJ1rvXipRDccljQ Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:29:04 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_937481E7-2918-4175-8399-B3A2F16A5FC6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the = wifi networks I encounter in my travels. Owen On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris = wrote: > "...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6" >=20 > Fine, as far as it goes. There is, however, a little problem with = bandwidth using wireless vs wired. So while wireless may be great for = trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those = trying to get real work done. > =20 > Bill Jouris > Inside Products, Inc. > www.insidethestack.com > 831-659-8360 > 925-855-9512 (direct) >=20 >=20 > From: Gert Doering > To: Nalini Elkins =20 > Cc: IPv6 Operations =20 > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration > > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6 > > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead > > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. > >=20 > > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. > >=20 > > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just = starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not = even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. >=20 > Yeah, the US. "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right? >=20 > > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. >=20 > I tend to forget... >=20 > But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks > go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-) >=20 > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > --=20 > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. = Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops --Apple-Mail=_937481E7-2918-4175-8399-B3A2F16A5FC6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 How = so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the wifi = networks I encounter in my = travels.

Owen

On Mar 31, = 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.= com> wrote:

"...just = subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6"

Fine, as far as it goes.  There = is, however, a little problem with bandwidth using wireless vs = wired.  So while wireless may be great for trying out IPv6, that = still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to get real = work done.
 
Bill = Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-6= 59-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)


=
From: Gert = Doering <gert@space.net>
= To: Nalini Elkins = <nalini.elkins@insidethest= ack.com>
Cc: = IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 = 8:21 AM
Subject: = Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins = wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam = wrote:
> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in = IPv6? Because migration
> > towards IPv6 would require = tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6
> > completely = takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead
> = > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.
> =
> >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or = so.
>
> You have got to be kidding.   Most large = enterprises are just starting to learn to spell IPv6.  I talk to = quite few who say it is not even in their 5-year plan yet.  And = these are MAJOR US corporations.

Yeah, the US.  "We do not = need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?

> Just trying to inject a = little reality into the conversation.

I tend to forget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in = mobile networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 = :-)

Gert Doering
        -- = NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something = today...?

SpaceNet AG            =             Vorstand: Sebastian v. = Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          = Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen  =                 HRB: 136055 (AG = Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444          = USt-IdNr.: = DE813185279

_______________________________________________
v6op= s mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

<= br>
=
_______________________________________________
v6ops = mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops

= --Apple-Mail=_937481E7-2918-4175-8399-B3A2F16A5FC6-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:30:20 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD23D1A6FF1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:30:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.843 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.843 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id g71D9-FEY5BB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:30:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [76.96.32.253]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B536F1A6FE3 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.121]) by copdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id C7WM3M1.123666439; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:30:07 -0600 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by pacdcexhub04.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::1532:d330:f9a5:c8a1%18]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:30:07 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPRSXNx9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925rsFbiAgA69PICAAAkXgIAAh2kAgAAqsoCAAAVhAIAABKKA///BHtCAAATJQIAAPSCAgABT3AD//8anAA== Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:30:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> In-Reply-To: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.246] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_CF5F483714D7E2johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ackermann, Michael" , Nalini Elkins , Mikael Abrahamsson Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/fH_0fZcI-qtLkLIShixajivJVg8 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:30:18 -0000 --_000_CF5F483714D7E2johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SVB2NiBoYXMgYmVlbiBsYXVuY2hlZCBpbiBNSSwgcGxlYXNlIGNvbnRhY3QgbWUgb2ZmIGxpc3Qg c28gSSBjYW4gdmVyaWZ5IGZvciB5b3Ugc3BlY2lmaWNhbGx5LiAgSSBoYXZlIHJlcGxpZWQgdG8g c2V2ZXJhbCBmb2xrcyB1bmljYXN0LiAgU28gZmFyIHRoZSBpc3N1ZSBoYXMgZWl0aGVyIGJlZW4g b2xkIGN1c3RvbWVyIG93bmVkIG1vZGVtcyBvciBjdXN0b21lciBvd25lZCBDUEUgdGhhdCBoYXMg bm90IGJlZW4gdXBncmFkZWQgb3IgZW5hYmxlZCB0byBzdXBwb3J0IElQdjYuICBJbiBvbmUgY2Fz ZSBJIGhhdmUgdGhlIGJhbGwgdG8gbGF1bmNoIElQdjYgY2FwYWJsZSBmaXJtd2FyZSBmb3Igb3Vy IGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgYnJvYWRiYW5kIGRldmljZS4NCg0KSm9obg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCkpvaG4gSmFzb24gQnJ6b3pvd3NraQ0KQ29tY2FzdCBD YWJsZQ0KbSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02NTk0DQpvKSA0ODQtOTYyLTAwNjANCncpIHd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5u ZXQNCmUpIGpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbTxtYWlsdG86am9obl9icnpv em93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tPg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT0NCg0KRnJvbTogPEFja2VybWFubj4sIE1pa2UgQWNrZXJtYW5uIDxtYWNrZXJt YW5uQGJjYnNtLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb20+Pg0KRGF0ZTogTW9uZGF5 LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxNTo1NQ0KVG86IEpvaG4gQnJ6b3pvd3NraSA8Sm9obl9Ccnpv em93c2tpQENhYmxlLkNvbWNhc3QuY29tPG1haWx0bzpKb2huX0Jyem96b3dza2lAQ2FibGUuQ29t Y2FzdC5jb20+PiwgTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyA8bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5j b208bWFpbHRvOm5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRldGhlc3RhY2suY29tPj4sIE1pa2FlbCBBYnJh aGFtc3NvbiA8c3dtaWtlQHN3bS5wcC5zZTxtYWlsdG86c3dtaWtlQHN3bS5wcC5zZT4+DQpDYzog djZvcHMgPHY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnPG1haWx0bzp2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4+DQpTdWJqZWN0OiBS RTogW3Y2b3BzXSBGYWNlYm9vayB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50DQoNClRoYW5rcyBKb2huDQoNCkkgd291 bGQgYmUgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCBpbiB3aGVuIENvbWNhc3Qgd2lsbCBoYXZlIElQVjYgaW4gNDgwODMs IDQ4ODU4IGFuZCA0ODIyNi4gICBBbGwgYXJlIGluIE1pY2hpZ2FuLiAgICBJIGNhbm5vdCBzZWVt IHRvIGdldCBhbiBlc3RpbWF0ZSBvbiB0aGlzIHRocm91Z2ggY29udmVudGlvbmFsIG1lY2hhbmlz bXMsIHNvIGFueSBpbmZvIHlvdSBtaWdodCBoYXZlIHdvdWxkIGJlIGdyZWF0bHkgYXBwcmVjaWF0 ZWQuDQoNClRoYW5rcw0KDQpNaWtlDQoNCg0KDQpGcm9tOiBCcnpvem93c2tpLCBKb2huIFttYWls dG86Sm9obl9Ccnpvem93c2tpQENhYmxlLkNvbWNhc3QuY29tXQ0KU2VudDogTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJj aCAzMSwgMjAxNCAyOjU1IFBNDQpUbzogQWNrZXJtYW5uLCBNaWNoYWVsOyBOYWxpbmkgRWxraW5z OyBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24NCkNjOiBJUHY2IE9wZXJhdGlvbnMNClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBb djZvcHNdIEZhY2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQNCg0KUGVvcGxlIHdobyBhcmUgQ29tY2FzdCBj dXN0b21lcnMgdGhhdCBkbyBub3QgaGF2ZSBJUHY2IGNhbiBjb250YWN0IG1lIG9mZmxpbmUgb3Ig dW5pY2FzdCB2aWEgZW1haWwuDQoNClRvIGRhdGUgd2UgaGF2ZSBsYXVuY2hlZCByZXNpZGVudGlh bCBicm9hZGJhbmQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgbmF0aXZlIElQdjYuICBDb21tZXJjaWFsIERPQ1NJUyBJ UHY2IHN1cHBvcnQgaXMgaW4gcGxhbm5pbmcgYW5kIHdpbGwgYmUgbGF1bmNoZWQgc29vbiBob3Bl ZnVsbHkgYmVmb3JlIHRoZSBzdW1tZXIgdGltZS4NCg0KSm9obg0KPT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT0NCkpvaG4gSmFzb24gQnJ6b3pvd3NraQ0KQ29tY2FzdCBD YWJsZQ0KbSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02NTk0DQpvKSA0ODQtOTYyLTAwNjANCncpIHd3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5u ZXQ8aHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQ+DQplKSBqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lAY2FibGUuY29t Y2FzdC5jb208bWFpbHRvOmpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbT4NCj09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09DQoNCkZyb206IDxBY2tlcm1hbm4+ LCBNaWtlIEFja2VybWFubiA8bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb208bWFpbHRvOm1hY2tlcm1hbm5A YmNic20uY29tPj4NCkRhdGU6IE1vbmRheSwgTWFyY2ggMzEsIDIwMTQgYXQgMTE6MTcNClRvOiBO YWxpbmkgRWxraW5zIDxuYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNvbTxtYWlsdG86bmFs aW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb20+PiwgTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21p a2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPG1haWx0bzpzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPj4NCkNjOiB2Nm9wcyA8djZvcHNA aWV0Zi5vcmc8bWFpbHRvOnY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnPj4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZh Y2Vib29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQNCg0KU2FtZSBoZXJlIGluIE1pY2hpZ2FuLiAgICBJIHRyaWVk IHRvIGdldCBJUFY2IG9uIENvbWNhc3QgYW5kIGl0IGlzIG5vdCBhdmFpbGFibGUgaW4gdGhlIDMg YXJlYXMgSSB0cmllZCB3aXRoaW4gdGhlIHN0YXRlIG9mIE1JLg0KDQoNCg0KRnJvbTogdjZvcHMg W21haWx0bzp2Nm9wcy1ib3VuY2VzQGlldGYub3JnXSBPbiBCZWhhbGYgT2YgTmFsaW5pIEVsa2lu cw0KU2VudDogTW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCAxMDo1OSBBTQ0KVG86IE1pa2FlbCBBYnJh aGFtc3Nvbg0KQ2M6IElQdjYgT3BlcmF0aW9ucw0KU3ViamVjdDogUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJv b2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudA0KDQoNCj4+IFRoZSBJU1AgdG8gbXkgaG9tZSBpcyBDb21jYXN0LiAg SnVzdCBzYXlpbmcuICBTZWVtcyBkb3VidGZ1bCB0aGF0IHRoZXkgd2lsbCBnbyB1bmRlciBzaW5j ZSB0aGV5IHNlZW0gdG8gaGF2ZSBhIG5lYXIgbW9ub3BvbHkgaW4gdGhlIFVTLg0KDQo+Q29tY2Fz dCBpcyBkb2luZyBJUHY2IG9uIGEgd2lkZSBzY2FsZS4gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5jb21jYXN0Ni5uZXQv DQoNCj5BcyBmYXIgYXMgSSBjYW4gdGVsbCwgdGhleSBub3cgaGF2ZSB0aGUgbGFyZ2VzdCBJUHY2 IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaW4gdGhlIHdvcmxkLg0KDQpHdXlzLA0KDQpDb21jYXN0IGlzIGluZGVlZCBk b2luZyBJUHY2IGJ1dCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBkZXBlbmQgb24gaG93IGNsb3NlIHlvdSBhcmUgdG8g YSBtYWpvciB1cmJhbiBjZW50ZXIuICAgSSBoYXZlIGFza2VkIGJlZm9yZSBhbmQgd2FzIHRvbGQg dGhhdCBpdCB3YXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiBteSBhcmVhLiAgQlRXLCAgSSAgZG8gbm90IGxp dmUgQ09NUExFVEVMWSBpbiB0aGUgbWlkZGxlIG9mIG5vd2hlcmUuICAgSnVzdCB3aGVyZSB5b3Ug Y2FuIGFjdHVhbGx5IGJlIHN1cnJvdW5kZWQgYnkgdHJlZXMgYW5kIGNsZWFuIGFpci4NCg0KVGhl IGxvY2FsIG9mZmljZSBvcGVucyBhdCA5OjAwYW0gbXkgdGltZS4gIChhYm91dCBhbiBob3VyKS4g IEkgd2lsbCBhc2sgYWdhaW4gKG5pY2VseSEpIGFuZCBwb3N0IHRoZSByZXN1bHRzIG9mIHdoYXQg SSBnZXQuICBJIGhvcGUgdG8gc3RhbmQgY29ycmVjdGVkLg0KDQpOYWxpbmkNCg0KDQoNCg0KVGhl IGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGNvbnRhaW5lZCBpbiB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmljYXRpb24gaXMgaGlnaGx5IGNv bmZpZGVudGlhbCBhbmQgaXMgaW50ZW5kZWQgc29sZWx5IGZvciB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIHRoZSBpbmRp dmlkdWFsKHMpIHRvIHdob20gdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGlzIGRpcmVjdGVkLiBJZiB5b3Ug YXJlIG5vdCB0aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50LCB5b3UgYXJlIGhlcmVieSBub3RpZmllZCB0 aGF0IGFueSB2aWV3aW5nLCBjb3B5aW5nLCBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIG9yIGRpc3RyaWJ1dGlvbiBvZiB0 aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIFBsZWFzZSBub3RpZnkgdGhlIHNlbmRlciwg YnkgZWxlY3Ryb25pYyBtYWlsIG9yIHRlbGVwaG9uZSwgb2YgYW55IHVuaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjZWlw dCBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBtZXNzYWdlIHdpdGhvdXQgbWFraW5nIGFueSBjb3Bp ZXMuDQoNCkJsdWUgQ3Jvc3MgQmx1ZSBTaGllbGQgb2YgTWljaGlnYW4gYW5kIEJsdWUgQ2FyZSBO ZXR3b3JrIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFyZSBub25wcm9maXQgY29ycG9yYXRpb25zIGFuZCBpbmRlcGVu ZGVudCBsaWNlbnNlZXMgb2YgdGhlIEJsdWUgQ3Jvc3MgYW5kIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIEFzc29jaWF0 aW9uLg0KDQoNClRoZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWluZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9u IGlzIGhpZ2hseSBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgYW5kIGlzIGludGVuZGVkIHNvbGVseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVz ZSBvZiB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbChzKSB0byB3aG9tIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBkaXJl Y3RlZC4gSWYgeW91IGFyZSBub3QgdGhlIGludGVuZGVkIHJlY2lwaWVudCwgeW91IGFyZSBoZXJl Ynkgbm90aWZpZWQgdGhhdCBhbnkgdmlld2luZywgY29weWluZywgZGlzY2xvc3VyZSBvciBkaXN0 cmlidXRpb24gb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVkLiBQbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5 IHRoZSBzZW5kZXIsIGJ5IGVsZWN0cm9uaWMgbWFpbCBvciB0ZWxlcGhvbmUsIG9mIGFueSB1bmlu dGVuZGVkIHJlY2VpcHQgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgbWVzc2FnZSB3aXRob3V0IG1h a2luZyBhbnkgY29waWVzLg0KDQpCbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFu ZCBCbHVlIENhcmUgTmV0d29yayBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhcmUgbm9ucHJvZml0IGNvcnBvcmF0aW9u cyBhbmQgaW5kZXBlbmRlbnQgbGljZW5zZWVzIG9mIHRoZSBCbHVlIENyb3NzIGFuZCBCbHVlIFNo aWVsZCBBc3NvY2lhdGlvbi4NCg== --_000_CF5F483714D7E2johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <6916E011AFFB8845A5C94B9ECD2AA685@cable.comcast.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWw+DQo8aGVhZD4NCjxtZXRhIGh0dHAtZXF1aXY9IkNvbnRlbnQtVHlwZSIgY29udGVudD0i dGV4dC9odG1sOyBjaGFyc2V0PXV0Zi04Ij4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5IHN0eWxlPSJ3b3JkLXdy YXA6IGJyZWFrLXdvcmQ7IC13ZWJraXQtbmJzcC1tb2RlOiBzcGFjZTsgLXdlYmtpdC1saW5lLWJy ZWFrOiBhZnRlci13aGl0ZS1zcGFjZTsiPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxmb250IGZhY2U9 IkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+SVB2NiBoYXMgYmVlbiBsYXVuY2hlZCBpbiBNSSwgcGxlYXNl IGNvbnRhY3QgbWUgb2ZmIGxpc3Qgc28mbmJzcDtJIGNhbiB2ZXJpZnkgZm9yIHlvdSBzcGVjaWZp Y2FsbHkuICZuYnNwO0kgaGF2ZSZuYnNwO3JlcGxpZWQgdG8gc2V2ZXJhbCBmb2xrcyB1bmljYXN0 LiAmbmJzcDtTbyBmYXIgdGhlIGlzc3VlIGhhcyBlaXRoZXIgYmVlbiBvbGQgY3VzdG9tZXIgb3du ZWQgbW9kZW1zIG9yJm5ic3A7Y3VzdG9tZXIgb3duZWQgQ1BFIHRoYXQNCiBoYXMgbm90IGJlZW4g dXBncmFkZWQgb3IgZW5hYmxlZCZuYnNwO3RvIHN1cHBvcnQgSVB2Ni4gJm5ic3A7SW4gb25lIGNh c2UmbmJzcDtJIGhhdmUgdGhlIGJhbGwgdG8gbGF1bmNoIElQdjYgY2FwYWJsZSBmaXJtd2FyZSBm b3Igb3VyIGNvbW1lcmNpYWwgYnJvYWRiYW5kJm5ic3A7ZGV2aWNlLjwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXY+PGZvbnQgZmFjZT0iQ2FsaWJyaSxzYW5zLXNlcmlmIj48YnI+DQo8L2ZvbnQ+PC9kaXY+DQo8 ZGl2Pjxmb250IGZhY2U9IkNhbGlicmksc2Fucy1zZXJpZiI+Sm9objwvZm9udD48L2Rpdj4NCjxk aXYgc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMCwgMCwgMCk7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5z LXNlcmlmOyBmb250LXNpemU6IDE4cHg7Ij4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGlt ZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT08L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiAnVGlt ZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+Sm9obiBKYXNvbiBCcnpvem93c2tp PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbic7IGZvbnQt c2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPkNvbWNhc3QgQ2FibGU8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFt aWx5OiAnVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuJzsgZm9udC1zaXplOiBtZWRpdW07ICI+bSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02 NTk0PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbic7IGZv bnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPm8pIDQ4NC05NjItMDA2MDwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6ICdUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj53KSB3d3cu Y29tY2FzdDYubmV0PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTogJ1RpbWVzIE5ldyBS b21hbic7IGZvbnQtc2l6ZTogbWVkaXVtOyAiPmUpJm5ic3A7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOmpvaG5f YnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbSI+am9obl9icnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNh c3QuY29tPC9hPjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6ICdUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9t YW4nOyBmb250LXNpemU6IG1lZGl1bTsgIj49PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PTwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBzdHlsZT0iY29s b3I6IHJnYigwLCAwLCAwKTsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGZvbnQt c2l6ZTogMThweDsiPg0KPGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8c3BhbiBpZD0iT0xLX1NSQ19CT0RZX1NFQ1RJ T04iIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjogcmdiKDAsIDAsIDApOyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZjsgZm9udC1zaXplOiAxOHB4OyI+DQo8ZGl2IHN0eWxlPSJmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxp YnJpOyBmb250LXNpemU6MTFwdDsgdGV4dC1hbGlnbjpsZWZ0OyBjb2xvcjpibGFjazsgQk9SREVS LUJPVFRPTTogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IEJPUkRFUi1MRUZUOiBtZWRpdW0gbm9uZTsgUEFERElORy1C T1RUT006IDBpbjsgUEFERElORy1MRUZUOiAwaW47IFBBRERJTkctUklHSFQ6IDBpbjsgQk9SREVS LVRPUDogI2I1YzRkZiAxcHQgc29saWQ7IEJPUkRFUi1SSUdIVDogbWVkaXVtIG5vbmU7IFBBRERJ TkctVE9QOiAzcHQiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0OmJvbGQiPkZyb206IDwvc3Bh bj4mbHQ7QWNrZXJtYW5uJmd0OywgTWlrZSBBY2tlcm1hbm4gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpt YWNrZXJtYW5uQGJjYnNtLmNvbSI+bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb208L2E+Jmd0Ozxicj4NCjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5EYXRlOiA8L3NwYW4+TW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAz MSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxNTo1NTxicj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXdlaWdodDpib2xkIj5Ubzog PC9zcGFuPkpvaG4gQnJ6b3pvd3NraSAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOkpvaG5fQnJ6b3pvd3Nr aUBDYWJsZS5Db21jYXN0LmNvbSI+Sm9obl9Ccnpvem93c2tpQENhYmxlLkNvbWNhc3QuY29tPC9h PiZndDssIE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpuYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGlu c2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNvbSI+bmFsaW5pLmVsa2luc0BpbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb208L2E+Jmd0 OywgTWlrYWVsDQogQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBw LnNlIj5zd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC13ZWln aHQ6Ym9sZCI+Q2M6IDwvc3Bhbj52Nm9wcyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnY2b3BzQGlldGYu b3JnIj52Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZzwvYT4mZ3Q7PGJyPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtd2VpZ2h0 OmJvbGQiPlN1YmplY3Q6IDwvc3Bhbj5SRTogW3Y2b3BzXSBGYWNlYm9vayB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50 PGJyPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxicj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJsb2NrcXVvdGUgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRM T09LX0FUVFJJQlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiIHN0eWxlPSJCT1JERVItTEVGVDogI2I1YzRkZiA1 IHNvbGlkOyBQQURESU5HOjAgMCAwIDU7IE1BUkdJTjowIDAgMCA1OyI+DQo8ZGl2IHhtbG5zOnY9 InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1jb206dm1sIiB4bWxuczpvPSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNy b3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTpvZmZpY2UiIHhtbG5zOnc9InVybjpzY2hlbWFzLW1pY3Jvc29mdC1j b206b2ZmaWNlOndvcmQiIHhtbG5zOm09Imh0dHA6Ly9zY2hlbWFzLm1pY3Jvc29mdC5jb20vb2Zm aWNlLzIwMDQvMTIvb21tbCIgeG1sbnM9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cudzMub3JnL1RSL1JFQy1odG1sNDAi Pg0KPG1ldGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxMiAoZmls dGVyZWQgbWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZv bnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAz IDUgNCA2IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5v c2UtMToyIDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OlRh aG9tYTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDExIDYgNCAzIDUgNCA0IDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0 aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3JtYWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJn aW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1ib3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUaW1lcyBOZXcgUm9tYW4iLCJzZXJpZiI7fQ0KYTpsaW5rLCBzcGFuLk1zb0h5 cGVybGluaw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6Ymx1ZTsNCgl0ZXh0LWRl Y29yYXRpb246dW5kZXJsaW5lO30NCmE6dmlzaXRlZCwgc3Bhbi5Nc29IeXBlcmxpbmtGb2xsb3dl ZA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJY29sb3I6cHVycGxlOw0KCXRleHQtZGVjb3Jh dGlvbjp1bmRlcmxpbmU7fQ0KcA0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtcHJpb3JpdHk6OTk7DQoJbXNvLW1hcmdp bi10b3AtYWx0OmF1dG87DQoJbWFyZ2luLXJpZ2h0OjBpbjsNCgltc28tbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbS1h bHQ6YXV0bzsNCgltYXJnaW4tbGVmdDowaW47DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjBwdDsNCglmb250LWZh bWlseToiVGltZXMgTmV3IFJvbWFuIiwic2VyaWYiO30NCnAuTXNvQWNldGF0ZSwgbGkuTXNvQWNl dGF0ZSwgZGl2Lk1zb0FjZXRhdGUNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCW1zby1zdHls ZS1saW5rOiJCYWxsb29uIFRleHQgQ2hhciI7DQoJbWFyZ2luOjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t Oi4wMDAxcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjguMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUYWhvbWEiLCJzYW5z LXNlcmlmIjt9DQpzcGFuLkVtYWlsU3R5bGUxNw0KCXttc28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpwZXJzb25hbDsN Cglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsInNhbnMtc2VyaWYiOw0KCWNvbG9yOiMxRjQ5N0Q7fQ0K c3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTkNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtcmVwbHk7DQoJZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjsNCgljb2xvcjojMUY0OTdEO30NCnNwYW4u QmFsbG9vblRleHRDaGFyDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1uYW1lOiJCYWxsb29uIFRleHQgQ2hhciI7DQoJ bXNvLXN0eWxlLXByaW9yaXR5Ojk5Ow0KCW1zby1zdHlsZS1saW5rOiJCYWxsb29uIFRleHQiOw0K CWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJUYWhvbWEiLCJzYW5zLXNlcmlmIjt9DQouTXNvQ2hwRGVmYXVsdA0KCXtt c28tc3R5bGUtdHlwZTpleHBvcnQtb25seTsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTAuMHB0O30NCkBwYWdlIFdv cmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtzaXplOjguNWluIDExLjBpbjsNCgltYXJnaW46MS4waW4gMS4waW4gMS4w aW4gMS4waW47fQ0KZGl2LldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMQ0KCXtwYWdlOldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMTt9DQotLT48 L3N0eWxlPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1zbyA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVkZWZhdWx0cyB2OmV4dD0i ZWRpdCIgc3BpZG1heD0iMTAyNiIgLz4NCjwveG1sPjwhW2VuZGlmXS0tPjwhLS1baWYgZ3RlIG1z byA5XT48eG1sPg0KPG86c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQgdjpleHQ9ImVkaXQiPg0KPG86aWRtYXAgdjpleHQ9 ImVkaXQiIGRhdGE9IjEiIC8+DQo8L286c2hhcGVsYXlvdXQ+PC94bWw+PCFbZW5kaWZdLS0+DQo8 ZGl2IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5rPSJibHVlIiB2bGluaz0icHVycGxlIj4NCjxkaXYgY2xhc3M9 IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigz MSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij5UaGFua3MgSm9objxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNz PSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBD YWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdiKDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7 PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogcmdi KDMxLCA3MywgMTI1KTsiPkkgd291bGQgYmUgaW50ZXJlc3RlZCBpbiB3aGVuIENvbWNhc3Qgd2ls bCBoYXZlIElQVjYgaW4gNDgwODMsIDQ4ODU4IGFuZCA0ODIyNi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgQWxsIGFy ZSBpbiBNaWNoaWdhbi4mbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDsgSSBjYW5ub3Qgc2VlbSB0byBnZXQgYW4g ZXN0aW1hdGUgb24gdGhpcw0KIHRocm91Z2ggY29udmVudGlvbmFsIG1lY2hhbmlzbXMsIHNvIGFu eSBpbmZvIHlvdSBtaWdodCBoYXZlIHdvdWxkIGJlIGdyZWF0bHkgYXBwcmVjaWF0ZWQuDQo8bzpw PjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9u dC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJn YigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0i TXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2Fs aWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij5UaGFua3M8bzpwPjwv bzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigz MSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJy aSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij5NaWtlPG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MTFwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMzEsIDcz LCAxMjUpOyI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1h bCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTFwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNh bnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMzEsIDczLCAxMjUpOyI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3Nw YW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTFw dDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiByZ2IoMzEsIDczLCAx MjUpOyI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJv cmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBwdDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBp biAwaW4gMGluIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNp emU6IDEwcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBUYWhvbWEsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Ij5Gcm9tOjwvc3Bhbj48 L2I+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTBwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IFRhaG9tYSwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZjsiPiBCcnpvem93c2tpLCBKb2huIFs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86Sm9obl9Ccnpvem93 c2tpQENhYmxlLkNvbWNhc3QuY29tIj5tYWlsdG86Sm9obl9Ccnpvem93c2tpQENhYmxlLkNvbWNh c3QuY29tPC9hPl0NCjxicj4NCjxiPlNlbnQ6PC9iPiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IDI6 NTUgUE08YnI+DQo8Yj5Ubzo8L2I+IEFja2VybWFubiwgTWljaGFlbDsgTmFsaW5pIEVsa2luczsg TWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uPGJyPg0KPGI+Q2M6PC9iPiBJUHY2IE9wZXJhdGlvbnM8YnI+DQo8 Yj5TdWJqZWN0OjwvYj4gUmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudDxvOnA+PC9v OnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48bzpw PiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvcD4NCjxkaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3Jt YWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmks IHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPlBlb3BsZSB3aG8gYXJlIENvbWNhc3QgY3VzdG9t ZXJzIHRoYXQgZG8gbm90IGhhdmUgSVB2NiBjYW4gY29udGFjdCBtZSBvZmZsaW5lIG9yIHVuaWNh c3QgdmlhIGVtYWlsLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNs YXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+ PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7 IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPlRvIGRhdGUgd2UgaGF2ZSBsYXVuY2hlZCByZXNpZGVudGlhbCBicm9h ZGJhbmQgc3VwcG9ydCBmb3IgbmF0aXZlIElQdjYuICZuYnNwO0NvbW1lcmNpYWwgRE9DU0lTIElQ djYgc3VwcG9ydCBpcyBpbiBwbGFubmluZyBhbmQgd2lsbCBiZSBsYXVuY2hlZCBzb29uIGhvcGVm dWxseQ0KIGJlZm9yZSB0aGUgc3VtbWVyIHRpbWUuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9k aXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTog MTMuNXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IGJsYWNrOyI+ PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTMuNXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2Fs aWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IGJsYWNrOyI+Sm9objxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHls ZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEzLjVwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT08bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEzLjVwdDtjb2xvcjpi bGFjayI+Sm9obiBKYXNvbiBCcnpvem93c2tpPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMy41 cHQ7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkNvbWNhc3QgQ2FibGU8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEz LjVwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+bSkgNjA5LTM3Ny02NTk0PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0K PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6 ZToxMy41cHQ7Y29sb3I6YmxhY2siPm8pIDQ4NC05NjItMDA2MDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwv cD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6MTMuNXB0O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj53KSA8YSBocmVmPSJodHRwOi8vd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2 Lm5ldCI+DQp3d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0PC9hPjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTMu NXB0O2NvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5lKSZuYnNwOzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpqb2huX2Jyem96b3dza2lA Y2FibGUuY29tY2FzdC5jb20iPmpvaG5fYnJ6b3pvd3NraUBjYWJsZS5jb21jYXN0LmNvbTwvYT48 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjEzLjVwdDtjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT08bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMy41cHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5z LXNlcmlmOyBjb2xvcjogYmxhY2s7Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rp dj4NCjxkaXYgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci10b3A6c29saWQgI0I1QzRERiAxLjBw dDtwYWRkaW5nOjMuMHB0IDBpbiAwaW4gMGluIj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxiPjxz cGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDExcHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNl cmlmOyBjb2xvcjogYmxhY2s7Ij5Gcm9tOg0KPC9zcGFuPjwvYj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1z aXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IGJsYWNr OyI+Jmx0O0Fja2VybWFubiZndDssIE1pa2UgQWNrZXJtYW5uICZsdDs8YSBocmVmPSJtYWlsdG86 bWFja2VybWFubkBiY2JzbS5jb20iPm1hY2tlcm1hbm5AYmNic20uY29tPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8 Yj5EYXRlOiA8L2I+TW9uZGF5LCBNYXJjaCAzMSwgMjAxNCBhdCAxMToxNzxicj4NCjxiPlRvOiA8 L2I+TmFsaW5pIEVsa2lucyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOm5hbGluaS5lbGtpbnNAaW5zaWRl dGhlc3RhY2suY29tIj5uYWxpbmkuZWxraW5zQGluc2lkZXRoZXN0YWNrLmNvbTwvYT4mZ3Q7LCBN aWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb24gJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlIj5z d21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5DYzogPC9iPnY2b3BzICZsdDs8YSBocmVm PSJtYWlsdG86djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPnY2b3BzQGlldGYub3JnPC9hPiZndDs8YnI+DQo8Yj5T dWJqZWN0OiA8L2I+UmU6IFt2Nm9wc10gRmFjZWJvb2sgdjYgZGVwbG95bWVudDxvOnA+PC9vOnA+ PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7 IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGJs b2NrcXVvdGUgc3R5bGU9ImJvcmRlcjpub25lO2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0OnNvbGlkICNCNUM0REYgNC41 cHQ7cGFkZGluZzowaW4gMGluIDBpbiA0LjBwdDttYXJnaW4tbGVmdDozLjc1cHQ7bWFyZ2luLXJp Z2h0OjBpbiIgaWQ9Ik1BQ19PVVRMT09LX0FUVFJJQlVUSU9OX0JMT0NLUVVPVEUiPg0KPGRpdj4N CjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0 OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEy NSk7Ij5TYW1lIGhlcmUgaW4gTWljaGlnYW4uJm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7Jm5ic3A7IEkgdHJpZWQgdG8g Z2V0IElQVjYgb24gQ29tY2FzdCBhbmQgaXQgaXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBpbiB0aGUgMyBhcmVh cyBJIHRyaWVkIHdpdGhpbiB0aGUgc3RhdGUgb2YgTUkuDQo8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNv bG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48 c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fucy1z ZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs Ij48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwgc2Fu cy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4gc3R5 bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9y bWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOiAxMXB0OyBmb250LWZhbWlseTogQ2FsaWJyaSwg c2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IHJnYigzMSwgNzMsIDEyNSk7Ij4mbmJzcDs8L3NwYW4+PHNwYW4g c3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPGRpdiBz dHlsZT0iYm9yZGVyOm5vbmU7Ym9yZGVyLXRvcDpzb2xpZCAjQjVDNERGIDEuMHB0O3BhZGRpbmc6 My4wcHQgMGluIDBpbiAwaW4iPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PGI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZTogMTBwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IFRhaG9tYSwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6 IGJsYWNrOyI+RnJvbTo8L3NwYW4+PC9iPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6IDEwcHQ7IGZv bnQtZmFtaWx5OiBUYWhvbWEsIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBibGFjazsiPiB2Nm9wcyBbPGEg aHJlZj0ibWFpbHRvOnY2b3BzLWJvdW5jZXNAaWV0Zi5vcmciPm1haWx0bzp2Nm9wcy1ib3VuY2Vz QGlldGYub3JnPC9hPl0NCjxiPk9uIEJlaGFsZiBPZiA8L2I+TmFsaW5pIEVsa2luczxicj4NCjxi PlNlbnQ6PC9iPiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMxLCAyMDE0IDEwOjU5IEFNPGJyPg0KPGI+VG86PC9i PiBNaWthZWwgQWJyYWhhbXNzb248YnI+DQo8Yj5DYzo8L2I+IElQdjYgT3BlcmF0aW9uczxicj4N CjxiPlN1YmplY3Q6PC9iPiBSZTogW3Y2b3BzXSBGYWNlYm9vayB2NiBkZXBsb3ltZW50PC9zcGFu PjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+ Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNv Tm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtZmFtaWx5 OiBBcmlhbCwgc2Fucy1zZXJpZjsgY29sb3I6IGJsYWNrOyI+Jm5ic3A7PC9zcGFuPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0K PGRpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0 ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mZ3Q7Jmd0OyBUaGUgSVNQIHRvIG15IGhvbWUg aXMgQ29tY2FzdC4gJm5ic3A7SnVzdCBzYXlpbmcuICZuYnNwO1NlZW1zIGRvdWJ0ZnVsIHRoYXQg dGhleSB3aWxsIGdvIHVuZGVyIHNpbmNlIHRoZXkgc2VlbSB0byBoYXZlIGEgbmVhciBtb25vcG9s eSBpbiB0aGUgVVMuPGJyPg0KPGJyPg0KJmd0O0NvbWNhc3QgaXMgZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBvbiBhIHdp ZGUgc2NhbGUuIDxhIGhyZWY9Imh0dHA6Ly93d3cuY29tY2FzdDYubmV0LyI+aHR0cDovL3d3dy5j b21jYXN0Ni5uZXQvPC9hPjxicj4NCjxicj4NCiZndDtBcyBmYXIgYXMgSSBjYW4gdGVsbCwgdGhl eSBub3cgaGF2ZSB0aGUgbGFyZ2VzdCBJUHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQgaW4gdGhlIHdvcmxkLjxvOnA+ PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiIHN0 eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2siPiZuYnNwOzxv OnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPGRpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwi IHN0eWxlPSJiYWNrZ3JvdW5kOndoaXRlIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iY29sb3I6YmxhY2siPkd1eXMs Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1z b05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFj ayI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9 Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpi bGFjayI+Q29tY2FzdCBpcyBpbmRlZWQgZG9pbmcgSVB2NiBidXQgaXQgc2VlbXMgdG8gZGVwZW5k IG9uIGhvdyBjbG9zZSB5b3UgYXJlIHRvIGEgbWFqb3IgdXJiYW4gY2VudGVyLiAmbmJzcDsgSSBo YXZlIGFza2VkIGJlZm9yZSBhbmQgd2FzIHRvbGQgdGhhdCBpdCB3YXMgbm90IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBp biBteSBhcmVhLiAmbmJzcDtCVFcsICZuYnNwO0kgJm5ic3A7ZG8gbm90DQogbGl2ZSBDT01QTEVU RUxZIGluIHRoZSBtaWRkbGUgb2Ygbm93aGVyZS4gJm5ic3A7IEp1c3Qgd2hlcmUgeW91IGNhbiBh Y3R1YWxseSBiZSBzdXJyb3VuZGVkIGJ5IHRyZWVzIGFuZCBjbGVhbiBhaXIuPG86cD48L286cD48 L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9ImJh Y2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+Jm5ic3A7PG86cD48L286 cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCIgc3R5bGU9 ImJhY2tncm91bmQ6d2hpdGUiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpibGFjayI+VGhlIGxvY2FsIG9m ZmljZSBvcGVucyBhdCA5OjAwYW0gbXkgdGltZS4gJm5ic3A7KGFib3V0IGFuIGhvdXIpLiAmbmJz cDtJIHdpbGwgYXNrIGFnYWluIChuaWNlbHkhKSBhbmQgcG9zdCB0aGUgcmVzdWx0cyBvZiB3aGF0 IEkgZ2V0LiAmbmJzcDtJIGhvcGUgdG8gc3RhbmQgY29ycmVjdGVkLiAmbmJzcDsmbmJzcDs8bzpw PjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIiBz dHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj4mbmJzcDs8 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxkaXY+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFs IiBzdHlsZT0iYmFja2dyb3VuZDp3aGl0ZSI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOmJsYWNrIj5OYWxp bmk8YnI+DQo8YnI+DQombmJzcDs8bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2 Pg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBi bGFjazsiPjxvOnA+Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250 LXNpemU6IDEzLjVwdDsgZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IENhbGlicmksIHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7IGNvbG9yOiBi bGFjazsiPlRoZSBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBjb250YWluZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGlz IGhpZ2hseSBjb25maWRlbnRpYWwgYW5kIGlzIGludGVuZGVkIHNvbGVseSBmb3IgdGhlIHVzZSBv ZiB0aGUgaW5kaXZpZHVhbChzKSB0byB3aG9tIHRoaXMgY29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBkaXJlY3Rl ZC4gSWYgeW91DQogYXJlIG5vdCB0aGUgaW50ZW5kZWQgcmVjaXBpZW50LCB5b3UgYXJlIGhlcmVi eSBub3RpZmllZCB0aGF0IGFueSB2aWV3aW5nLCBjb3B5aW5nLCBkaXNjbG9zdXJlIG9yIGRpc3Ry aWJ1dGlvbiBvZiB0aGlzIGluZm9ybWF0aW9uIGlzIHByb2hpYml0ZWQuIFBsZWFzZSBub3RpZnkg dGhlIHNlbmRlciwgYnkgZWxlY3Ryb25pYyBtYWlsIG9yIHRlbGVwaG9uZSwgb2YgYW55IHVuaW50 ZW5kZWQgcmVjZWlwdCBhbmQgZGVsZXRlIHRoZSBvcmlnaW5hbCBtZXNzYWdlDQogd2l0aG91dCBt YWtpbmcgYW55IGNvcGllcy48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cD48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOiAxMy41cHQ7IGZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiBDYWxpYnJpLCBzYW5zLXNlcmlmOyBjb2xv cjogYmxhY2s7Ij5CbHVlIENyb3NzIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFuZCBCbHVlIENh cmUgTmV0d29yayBvZiBNaWNoaWdhbiBhcmUgbm9ucHJvZml0IGNvcnBvcmF0aW9ucyBhbmQgaW5k ZXBlbmRlbnQgbGljZW5zZWVzIG9mIHRoZSBCbHVlIENyb3NzIGFuZCBCbHVlIFNoaWVsZCBBc3Nv Y2lhdGlvbi48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9ibG9ja3F1 b3RlPg0KPC9kaXY+DQo8YnI+DQo8cD5UaGUgaW5mb3JtYXRpb24gY29udGFpbmVkIGluIHRoaXMg Y29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBpcyBoaWdobHkgY29uZmlkZW50aWFsIGFuZCBpcyBpbnRlbmRlZCBzb2xl bHkgZm9yIHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgdGhlIGluZGl2aWR1YWwocykgdG8gd2hvbSB0aGlzIGNvbW11bmlj YXRpb24gaXMgZGlyZWN0ZWQuIElmIHlvdSBhcmUgbm90IHRoZSBpbnRlbmRlZCByZWNpcGllbnQs IHlvdSBhcmUgaGVyZWJ5IG5vdGlmaWVkIHRoYXQgYW55IHZpZXdpbmcsIGNvcHlpbmcsDQogZGlz Y2xvc3VyZSBvciBkaXN0cmlidXRpb24gb2YgdGhpcyBpbmZvcm1hdGlvbiBpcyBwcm9oaWJpdGVk LiBQbGVhc2Ugbm90aWZ5IHRoZSBzZW5kZXIsIGJ5IGVsZWN0cm9uaWMgbWFpbCBvciB0ZWxlcGhv bmUsIG9mIGFueSB1bmludGVuZGVkIHJlY2VpcHQgYW5kIGRlbGV0ZSB0aGUgb3JpZ2luYWwgbWVz c2FnZSB3aXRob3V0IG1ha2luZyBhbnkgY29waWVzLjwvcD4NCjxwPkJsdWUgQ3Jvc3MgQmx1ZSBT aGllbGQgb2YgTWljaGlnYW4gYW5kIEJsdWUgQ2FyZSBOZXR3b3JrIG9mIE1pY2hpZ2FuIGFyZSBu b25wcm9maXQgY29ycG9yYXRpb25zIGFuZCBpbmRlcGVuZGVudCBsaWNlbnNlZXMgb2YgdGhlIEJs dWUgQ3Jvc3MgYW5kIEJsdWUgU2hpZWxkIEFzc29jaWF0aW9uLjwvcD4NCjwvZGl2Pg0KPC9kaXY+ DQo8L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+DQo8L3NwYW4+DQo8L2JvZHk+DQo8L2h0bWw+DQo= --_000_CF5F483714D7E2johnbrzozowskicablecomcastcom_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:31:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18FED1A6F90 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:31:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.21 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12nprHvqjtAS for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cable.comcast.com (pacdcavout01.cable.comcast.com [69.241.43.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813401A6F81 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ([24.40.56.116]) by pacdcavout01.cable.comcast.com with ESMTP id 97wm3m1.88754183; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:31:36 -0400 Received: from PACDCEXMB01.cable.comcast.com ([169.254.1.64]) by pacdcexhub03.cable.comcast.com ([fe80::5527:6d6b:29a7:f414%13]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:31:36 -0400 From: "Brzozowski, John" To: Owen DeLong , Mikael Abrahamsson Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPTR4vx9rHrXoCikutfLKo75c925r7pi6A Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:31:36 +0000 Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <7C10383F-6E05-4FF5-BBEF-CADCC8824CCF@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <7C10383F-6E05-4FF5-BBEF-CADCC8824CCF@delong.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.9.131030 x-originating-ip: [68.87.16.247] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/KPi7yDPsDiv5niArbyBYBDtM9vw Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:31:56 -0000 T3IgaWYgeW91IHByZWZlciB0byBidXkgeW91ciBvd24gbWFrZSBzdXJlIGl0IHN1cHBvcnRzIElQ djYgYmVmb3JlIHlvdSBidXkNCml0Lg0KDQo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PQ0KSm9obiBKYXNvbiBCcnpvem93c2tpDQpDb21jYXN0IENhYmxlDQptKSA2MDkt Mzc3LTY1OTQNCm8pIDQ4NC05NjItMDA2MA0Kdykgd3d3LmNvbWNhc3Q2Lm5ldA0KZSkgam9obl9i cnpvem93c2tpQGNhYmxlLmNvbWNhc3QuY29tDQo9PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09PT09 PT09PT09PT09PT09PQ0KDQoNCg0KDQoNCg0KLS0tLS1PcmlnaW5hbCBNZXNzYWdlLS0tLS0NCkZy b206IE93ZW4gRGVMb25nIDxvd2VuQGRlbG9uZy5jb20+DQpEYXRlOiBNb25kYXksIE1hcmNoIDMx LCAyMDE0IGF0IDE2OjE3DQpUbzogTWlrYWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNl Pg0KQ2M6IHY2b3BzIDx2Nm9wc0BpZXRmLm9yZz4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBbdjZvcHNdIEZhY2Vi b29rIHY2IGRlcGxveW1lbnQNCg0KPg0KPk9uIE1hciAzMSwgMjAxNCwgYXQgODowMyBBTSwgTWlr YWVsIEFicmFoYW1zc29uIDxzd21pa2VAc3dtLnBwLnNlPiB3cm90ZToNCj4NCj4+IE9uIE1vbiwg MzEgTWFyIDIwMTQsIE5hbGluaSBFbGtpbnMgd3JvdGU6DQo+PiANCj4+PiBDb21jYXN0IGlzIGlu ZGVlZCBkb2luZyBJUHY2IGJ1dCBpdCBzZWVtcyB0byBkZXBlbmQgb24gaG93IGNsb3NlIHlvdQ0K Pj4+YXJlIHRvIGEgbWFqb3IgdXJiYW4gY2VudGVyLiAgIEkgaGF2ZSBhc2tlZCBiZWZvcmUgYW5k IHdhcyB0b2xkIHRoYXQgaXQNCj4+PndhcyBub3QgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGluIG15IGFyZWEuICBCVFcs ICBJICBkbyBub3QgbGl2ZSBDT01QTEVURUxZIGluIHRoZQ0KPj4+bWlkZGxlIG9mIG5vd2hlcmUu ICAgSnVzdCB3aGVyZSB5b3UgY2FuIGFjdHVhbGx5IGJlIHN1cnJvdW5kZWQgYnkgdHJlZXMNCj4+ PmFuZCBjbGVhbiBhaXIuDQo+Pj4gDQo+Pj4gVGhlIGxvY2FsIG9mZmljZSBvcGVucyBhdCA5OjAw YW0gbXkgdGltZS4gIChhYm91dCBhbiBob3VyKS4gIEkgd2lsbA0KPj4+YXNrIGFnYWluIChuaWNl bHkhKSBhbmQgcG9zdCB0aGUgcmVzdWx0cyBvZiB3aGF0IEkgZ2V0LiAgSSBob3BlIHRvDQo+Pj5z dGFuZCBjb3JyZWN0ZWQuDQo+PiANCj4+IFdoZW4gbGlzdGVuaW5nIHRvIENvbWNhc3Qgc3RhZmYg cHJlc2VudGF0aW9ucyBvbiB0aGlzIGlzc3VlLCBpdCBkaWRuJ3QNCj4+c2VlbSBsaWtlIHNvbWV0 aGluZyB5b3UgbmVlZCB0byBhc2sgZm9yIGFuZCB0aGV5IHR1cm4gaXQgb24gb25seSBmb3INCj4+ eW91LCBpbnN0ZWFkIGl0J2xsIGJlIHR1cm5lZCBvbiB3aGVuZXZlciB0aGV5J3JlIGRvbmUgd2l0 aCB5b3VyIGFyZWEuDQo+DQo+WWVzIGFuZCBuby4NCj4NCj5JZiB5b3VyIGVxdWlwbWVudCBpcyBv bGQsIHlvdSBtaWdodCBoYXZlIHRvIGFzayBmb3IgdGhlbSB0byBzd2FwIGl0IG91dA0KPnRvIGdp dmUgeW91IHNvbWV0aGluZyBJUHY2IGNhcGFibGUuDQo+DQo+T3dlbg0KPg0KPl9fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fDQo+djZvcHMgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0 DQo+djZvcHNAaWV0Zi5vcmcNCj5odHRwczovL3d3dy5pZXRmLm9yZy9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZv L3Y2b3BzDQoNCg== From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:41:34 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A3631A7006 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:41:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tueHkFFHFnOK for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm16.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com (nm16.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com [216.109.114.39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C12C1A7001 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.196.81.157] by nm16.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 20:41:23 -0000 Received: from [66.196.81.148] by tm3.access.bullet.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 20:41:23 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1024.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 20:41:23 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 863411.14671.bm@omp1024.access.mail.bf1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 19493 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 20:41:23 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396298483; bh=AgmPE4QvGgM8Lc6ch8JQyWe+7QupDKQyFVC2vyYkYfE=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=6kvQprcfjEbkZftiscRj2yg4et8lboExQGHs2fX4o1yoDGBw4Wtq4ej5jIDlSO74xebrWN2PMAeNNNHGSIqACKQHb5mjSGgCP8jBjdDYMJPSPGzh7BCUK6Mgvix6+PDrd65JuNYH9nl1kHPSkbcpCTl8EG1S1EQOIHbPRAf6qpg= X-YMail-OSG: bzbuxzkVM1kjiJuc3Lg_iGN8N_g4Ktps7gamUMa6V12IiaX X_ZIWbWE27ctynSeA0KGkB0so7ZwFryELNQx7StEkqIk4GD9yFbmTay2GUgF yP_Z.pY2bVqmTfkSqtTDc2EOPLYUrKCi7Nrf_q8kLMAU1lHOLcyTdV1bf5aS PrqttXBEAhQcilAtHNU0YrJjFKVr9NAesbSqDc9K5v5Cpt2ztoTj1491PB0v Lrt6OcAcq8kaELnmpz6yYNscBHd5bY5ksVXTiaOBTTzD3d8VC6DxxsqP7_xP SYTWRTw5uKcbSgYpsc0m9SCFSryjKF60hhQvXLSEV21J.T2tI3uMoAXIayuq 51X81wTaKARzntSDocNHGIIzXDiR7vk_4vnWDD6v4WvQTg8KKG5WNJ.O6nB7 jATIYxTPzY1bLxIh36dUddfuvl3yDiF8MdhrUZgRd7CnLp8s9I.ZUl8u3KCu EdvX.AWwpmWH8KOZ8NTO3CSBA0004M6amtnHIwJQVFZlRtuNZXNz8ex226nV sFheEVN32PB26jW9X1P65Uz9sxJodGehK7WKws6OREGj5ETNsM1nyc_P152O cY4r1zQTc61yezwCVtGBaITZNOUi.bwyNrbKwheRX_04ve4iu99EH Received: from [50.143.174.186] by web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:41:23 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, SSB3YXMgdGhpbmtpbmcgb2Ygd2lyZWxlc3MgdnMsIGZvciBleGFtcGxlLCBjYWJsZSBtb2RlbSB3aXJlZCBjb25uZWN0aW9ucy7CoCBMVEUgbWF5IGJlIGJldHRlciB0aGFuIFdpRmksIGJ1dCBzdGlsbCBzZWVtcyB0byBzdHJ1Z2dsZSBpbiBjb21wYXJpc29uIHRvIHdpcmVkLgoKwqAKQmlsbCBKb3VyaXMKSW5zaWRlIFByb2R1Y3RzLCBJbmMuCnd3dy5pbnNpZGV0aGVzdGFjay5jb20KODMxLTY1OS04MzYwCjkyNS04NTUtOTUxMiAoZGlyZWN0KQoKCgoKX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18BMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> Message-ID: <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:41:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Jouris To: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-1051860855-81520090-1396298483=:14394" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/sMotK1g5UCNh5zyLEV96TENHEng Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Bill Jouris List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:41:30 -0000 ---1051860855-81520090-1396298483=:14394 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem wired connections.= =A0 LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to struggle in comparison = to wired.=0A=0A=A0=0ABill Jouris=0AInside Products, Inc.=0Awww.insidethesta= ck.com=0A831-659-8360=0A925-855-9512 (direct)=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A_______________= _________________=0A From: Owen DeLong =0ATo: Bill Jouris = =0ACc: Gert Doering ; IPv6= Operations =0ASent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 PM=0ASubj= ect: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment=0A =0A=0A=0AHow so? In most cases, = my LTE connections are faster than many of the wifi networks I encounter in= my travels.=0A=0AOwen=0A=0A=0AOn Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris wrote:=0A=0A"...just subscribe to verizon LTE= , get native IPv6"=0A>=0A>=0A>Fine, as far as it goes.=A0 There is, however= , a little problem with bandwidth using wireless vs wired.=A0 So while wire= less may be great for trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be = addressed by those trying to get real work done.=0A>=0A>=A0=0A>Bill Jouris= =0A>Inside Products, Inc.=0A>www.insidethestack.com=0A>831-659-8360=0A>925-= 855-9512 (direct)=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>________________________________=0A> F= rom: Gert Doering =0A>To: Nalini Elkins =0A>Cc: IPv6 Operations =0A>Sent: Monday, = March 31, 2014 8:21 AM=0A>Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment=0A> = =0A>=0A>Hi,=0A>=0A>On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins = wrote:=0A>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:= =0A>> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migr= ation=0A>> > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6=0A>> > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 t= unneling overhead=0A>> > would affect the overall efficiency and data deliv= ery.=0A>> =0A>> >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.= =0A>> =0A>> You have got to be kidding. =A0 Most large enterprises are just= starting to learn to spell IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say it is not = even in their 5-year plan yet. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations.=0A>= =0A>Yeah, the US.=A0 "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?=0A>=0A>> J= ust trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.=0A>=0A>I tend = to=0A forget...=0A>=0A>But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 i= n mobile networks=0A>go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-= )=0A>=0A>Gert Doering=0A>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- NetMaster=0A>-- =0A>have you en= abled IPv6 on something today...?=0A>=0A>SpaceNet AG=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard=0A>Joseph-Dollinger= -Bogen 14=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann=0A>D-= 80807 Muenchen=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen= )=0A>Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279=0A= >=0A>_______________________________________________=0A>v6ops mailing list= =0A>v6ops@ietf.org=0A>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops=0A>=0A>= =0A>_______________________________________________=0A>v6ops mailing list= =0A>v6ops@ietf.org=0A>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops=0A> ---1051860855-81520090-1396298483=:14394 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I was thinking of wir= eless vs, for example, cable modem wired connections.  LTE may be bett= er than WiFi, but still seems to struggle in comparison to wired.
 
Bill Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8360925-855-9512 (direct)


From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
= To: Bill Jouris <bill.j= ouris@insidethestack.com>
Cc:<= /span> Gert Doering <gert@space.net>; IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> Sent: Monday, March 31, = 2014 1:26 PM
Subject: = Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment

=0A
How so? In most cases, my LTE connections = are faster than many of the wifi networks I encounter in my travels.
Owen

On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill= Jouris <bil= l.jouris@insidethestack.com> wrote:

"...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get nat= ive IPv6"

<= div style=3D"font-size:13.3333px;font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;background-color:transparent;font-style:normal;">Fine, as far a= s it goes.  There is, however, a little problem with bandwidth using w= ireless vs wired.  So while wireless may be great for trying out IPv6,= that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to get real = work done.
 
<= span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.c= om>
Cc: IPv6 Ope= rations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 = AM
Subject: Re: [v6ops]= Facebook v6 deployment

=0AHi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nal= ini Elkins wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohamma= d Aazam wrote:
> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning i= n IPv6? Because migration
> > towards IPv6 would require tunneling= for a reasonable period, until IPv6
> > completely takes over fro= m IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead
> > would affect= the overall efficiency and data delivery.
>
> >The period = for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.
>
> You have g= ot to be kidding.   Most large enterprises are just starting to learn = to spell IPv6.  I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their 5-= year plan yet.  And these are MAJOR US corporations.

Yeah, the = US.  "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?

> Just tryi= ng to inject a little reality into the conversation.

I tend to=0A fo= rget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile= networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-)
Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have yo= u enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG     = ;                   Vorstand: = Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14       = ;   Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen =                 HRB: 136055 (AG M= uenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444          USt= -IdNr.: DE813185279

_______________________________________________<= br>v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
= https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops


___= ____________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/l= istinfo/v6ops



---1051860855-81520090-1396298483=:14394-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:54:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150021A701D for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:54:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.01 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id c_Gy6YAyKf6Z for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:54:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B9A51A7020 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:54:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.51.175] ([12.12.222.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2VKnXQi016108 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:49:35 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2VKnXQi016108 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396298975; bh=iCgqhWFNWcoXwu1F1bfwbf/++uU=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=bDjj158bZEpa1vuUyNEqsmBr1OwNLKOOnJ8SqMlryvvhyxH4/vEFQ92d/mpPJNkz1 tTZqrO5CrN4zbPTvaG86AwBaukuMKrFcqAJeHaeoU8iRHsUZMGkQGcijR430U36jrA O9+IYHRu7MivZ0om8w7tA5C5S4Opdey0zCYJmbps= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F741B3C6-FA65-4DFE-9D5A-B37F35D7B6D9" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:49:32 -0700 Message-Id: <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> To: Bill Jouris X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/-UhF0PDCgNJFjdgnOH7dKlXPTy0 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:54:13 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_F741B3C6-FA65-4DFE-9D5A-B37F35D7B6D9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill Jouris = wrote: > I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem wired = connections. LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to struggle = in comparison to wired. > =20 I=92m assuming that the wifi in hotels, conference centers, airports, = etc. is some form of wired connection as you describe behind it. My = performance problems generally don=92t seem to be the wifi, but the = wired connection behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is better = than if I had basic cable service, but I pay (a lot) extra for = middle-tier service on a business line (more than I pay for LTE as a = matter of fact) and it does, in fact, perform slightly better (LTE = 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps). Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my Comcast uplink. Owen > Bill Jouris > Inside Products, Inc. > www.insidethestack.com > 831-659-8360 > 925-855-9512 (direct) >=20 >=20 > From: Owen DeLong > To: Bill Jouris =20 > Cc: Gert Doering ; IPv6 Operations =20 > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 PM > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >=20 > How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the = wifi networks I encounter in my travels. >=20 > Owen >=20 > On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris = wrote: >=20 >> "...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6" >>=20 >> Fine, as far as it goes. There is, however, a little problem with = bandwidth using wireless vs wired. So while wireless may be great for = trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those = trying to get real work done. >> =20 >> Bill Jouris >> Inside Products, Inc. >> www.insidethestack.com >> 831-659-8360 >> 925-855-9512 (direct) >>=20 >>=20 >> From: Gert Doering >> To: Nalini Elkins =20 >> Cc: IPv6 Operations =20 >> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM >> Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >>=20 >> Hi, >>=20 >> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: >> > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: >> > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration >> > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6 >> > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead >> > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. >> >=20 >> > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. >> >=20 >> > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just = starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not = even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. >>=20 >> Yeah, the US. "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right? >>=20 >> > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. >>=20 >> I tend to forget... >>=20 >> But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks >> go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-) >>=20 >> Gert Doering >> -- NetMaster >> --=20 >> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? >>=20 >> SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard >> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. = Grundner-Culemann >> D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) >> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>=20 >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_F741B3C6-FA65-4DFE-9D5A-B37F35D7B6D9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill = Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.= com> wrote:

I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable = modem wired connections.  LTE may be better than WiFi, but still = seems to struggle in comparison to = wired.
 

= I=92m assuming that the wifi in hotels, conference centers, airports, = etc. is some form of wired connection as you describe behind it. My = performance problems generally don=92t seem to be the wifi, but the = wired connection behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is better = than if I had basic cable service, but I pay (a lot) extra for = middle-tier service on a business line (more than I pay for LTE as a = matter of fact) and it does, in fact, perform slightly better (LTE = 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps).

Often, my LTE = uplink performs better than my Comcast = uplink.

Owen

Bill = Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-6= 59-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)


=
From: Owen = DeLong <owen@delong.com>
= To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.= com>
Cc: = Gert Doering <gert@space.net>; = IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 = 1:26 PM
Subject: = Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment

How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are = faster than many of the wifi networks I encounter in my = travels.

Owen

On Mar 31, = 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.= com> wrote:

"...just subscribe to = verizon LTE, get native IPv6"

Fine, as = far as it goes.  There is, however, a little problem with bandwidth = using wireless vs wired.  So while wireless may be great for trying = out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying = to get real work done.
 
Bill Jouris
Inside Products, = Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-= 659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)


From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethest= ack.com>
Cc: = IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> =
Sent: Monday, March = 31, 2014 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 = deployment

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins = wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam = wrote:
> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in = IPv6? Because migration
> > towards IPv6 would require = tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6
> > completely = takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling overhead
> = > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.
> =
> >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or = so.
>
> You have got to be kidding.   Most large = enterprises are just starting to learn to spell IPv6.  I talk to = quite few who say it is not even in their 5-year plan yet.  And = these are MAJOR US corporations.

Yeah, the US.  "We do not = need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?

> Just trying to inject a = little reality into the conversation.

I tend to forget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in = mobile networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 = :-)

Gert Doering
        -- = NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something = today...?

SpaceNet AG            =             Vorstand: Sebastian v. = Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          = Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen  =                 HRB: 136055 (AG = Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444          = USt-IdNr.: = DE813185279

_______________________________________________
v6op= s mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops


=
_______________________________________________
v6ops = mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/= mailman/listinfo/v6ops



=
= --Apple-Mail=_F741B3C6-FA65-4DFE-9D5A-B37F35D7B6D9-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 13:59:59 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1E6D1A7021 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:59:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.189 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.189 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dVmadbNiJ9Yg for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:59:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.z120.zixworks.com (mx.z120.zixworks.com [199.30.235.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EE2D1A701B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:59:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) by Outbound.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id 76625111227 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:59:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva1.bcbsm.com (unknown [12.107.172.80]) by mx.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id BEBAA134762; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:59:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva1.bcbsm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA80 (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6267A4F804F; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:43:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA110.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (unknown [10.64.80.218]) by imsva1.bcbsm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AD6C4F804D; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:43:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::fdcb:603d:469e:b1db]) by PWN401EA110.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::716f:e3f0:b97f:8900%13]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:59:46 -0400 From: "Ackermann, Michael" To: Owen DeLong , Bill Jouris Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment Thread-Index: AQHPRSXNBdbDDM5GBUyCYXCSZI+Y2ZrsFbiAgA69PICAAAkXgIAAh2kAgAAqsoCAABRIAIAAAtIAgABSfwCAAAQrgIAAAkcA//++z9A= Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:59:45 +0000 Message-ID: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67D@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.10.35] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67DPWN401EA160entc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-VPM-HOST: vmvpm01.z120.zixworks.com X-VPM-GROUP-ID: 0e672597-34a4-4f75-ae98-eb9bd2d4062b X-VPM-MSG-ID: 0ec7327a-f3d4-422c-bb7d-f64ce744842a X-VPM-ENC-REGIME: Plaintext X-VPM-CERT-FLAG: 0 X-VPM-IS-HYBRID: 0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/Quqa87JP7JJNv2A6BXR8NjPJx28 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:59:58 -0000 --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67DPWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That sounds real good=21 But unfortunately for me does not match what I = experience. More than 50% of the locations I have been in the past 6 = months, are 3G. Of the 4G systems, only 2 I can remember ever being = over 20 Mbps (never 30 for me). Most of the time the 4G systems are = below 5Mbps. And very inconsistent during speed or throughput tests. Where are you getting 30Mbps? I am VERY jealous=21 Thanks Mike From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Owen DeLong Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 4:50 PM To: Bill Jouris Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill Jouris = >= wrote: I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem wired connections. = LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to struggle in comparison to = wired. I'm assuming that the wifi in hotels, conference centers, airports, etc. = is some form of wired connection as you describe behind it. My performance = problems generally don't seem to be the wifi, but the wired connection = behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is better than if I had = basic cable service, but I pay (a lot) extra for middle-tier service on a = business line (more than I pay for LTE as a matter of fact) and it does, = in fact, perform slightly better (LTE 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps). Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my Comcast uplink. Owen Bill Jouris Inside Products, Inc. www.insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) ________________________________ From: Owen DeLong > To: Bill Jouris = > Cc: Gert Doering >; IPv6 = Operations > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 PM Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the wifi = networks I encounter in my travels. Owen On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris = >= wrote: =22...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6=22 Fine, as far as it goes. There is, however, a little problem with = bandwidth using wireless vs wired. So while wireless may be great for = trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those = trying to get real work done. Bill Jouris Inside Products, Inc. www.insidethestack.com 831-659-8360 925-855-9512 (direct) ________________________________ From: Gert Doering > To: Nalini Elkins = > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment Hi, On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. > > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. > > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just starting = to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not even in = their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. Yeah, the US. =22We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4=22, right? > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. I tend to forget... But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6ops=40ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6ops=40ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and = is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies. =20 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are = nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association. --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67DPWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <=21--=5Bif =21mso=5D><=21=5Bendif=5D--><=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D--><=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D-->

That sounds real good=21    But = unfortunately for me does not match what I experience.    = More than 50% of the locations I have been in the past 6 months,  are 3G.   Of the 4G systems, only 2  I can remember ever being = over 20 Mbps (never 30 for me).   Most of the time the 4G = systems are below 5Mbps.   And very inconsistent during speed or = throughput tests.  

Where are you getting 30Mbps?    = I am VERY jealous=21 

 

Thanks

 

Mike

 

 

 

From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 4:50 PM
To: Bill Jouris
Cc: IPv6 Operations
Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment

 

 

On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris=40insideth= estack.com> wrote:



I was = thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem wired connections.  = LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to struggle in comparison to = wired.

 

 

I&=238217;m assuming that the wifi in hotels, = conference centers, airports, etc. is some form of wired connection as you = describe behind it. My performance problems generally don&=238217;t seem = to be the wifi, but the wired connection behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is better than if I had basic cable service, = but I pay (a lot) extra for middle-tier service on a business line (more = than I pay for LTE as a matter of fact) and it does, in fact, perform = slightly better (LTE 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps).

 

Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my = Comcast uplink.

 

Owen



Bill Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)

From: Owen DeLong <owen=40delong.com>
To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris=40insideth= estack.com>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert=40space.net>; IPv6 = Operations <v6ops=40ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 PM
Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment



How so? In most = cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the wifi networks I = encounter in my travels.

 

Owen

 

On Mar 31, 2014, = at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris=40insidethestack.com> = wrote:



"...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native = IPv6"

 

Fine, as far as it goes.  There is, however, a little = problem with bandwidth using wireless vs wired.  So while wireless = may be great for trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying to get real work = done.

 

Bill Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 (direct)

From: Gert Doering <gert=40space.net>
To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins=40insidethestack.com>
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops=40ietf.org>
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM
Subject: Re: =5Bv6ops=5D Facebook v6 deployment


Hi,

On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM &=2343;0500, Mohammad Aazam = wrote:
> > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration
> > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6
> > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 = tunneling overhead
> > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.
>
> >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.
>
> You have got to be kidding.   Most large enterprises are just = starting to learn to spell IPv6.  I talk to quite few who say it is = not even in their 5-year plan yet.  And these are MAJOR US = corporations.

Yeah, the US.  "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", = right?

> Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.

I tend to forget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-)

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                  =       Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          = Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                =   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: &=2343;49 (0)89/32356-444          = USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops=40ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

____________________________________________= ___
v6ops mailing list
v6ops=40ietf.org
https://www.ietf.o= rg/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

 

 

 


The information contained in this communication is highly confidential = and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan = are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association.

--_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67DPWN401EA160entc_-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:08:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B551A6F32 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:08:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fyAR5Ogbhrh7 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E54EA1A08CB for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:08:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.26.51.175] ([12.12.222.82]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id s2VL6t7I021273 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:06:56 -0700 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 owen.delong.com s2VL6t7I021273 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1396300017; bh=dGtc0t+ho/WWkr0zFp3lR2FRzTg=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=KjfLKYAclQ6bFf4x1HJiYoXDnyZSQHMDKEWx1TlTNfWPw0t/be1fqWvXk4qbd0IEi jhpIOi77DMCdlPzSKbClRFJ9sOuvZDGw4qqtzkxpFaPw9/vZr/b9T5AT0rUJWLNdse jRv8nj7qz9APN7nqQl6qp6lMRuiZzx9/1NXPBvos= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C49209E6-B57D-4E56-A551-8CC9CFA50E27" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Owen DeLong In-Reply-To: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67D@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:06:54 -0700 Message-Id: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B67D@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> To: "Ackermann, Michael" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0rc1 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:06:57 -0700 (PDT) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/_xpvx5xmXxGEbNA3EQNp53MnVag Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:08:50 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C49209E6-B57D-4E56-A551-8CC9CFA50E27 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:59 PM, Ackermann, Michael = wrote: > That sounds real good! But unfortunately for me does not match what = I experience. More than 50% of the locations I have been in the past = 6 months, are 3G. Of the 4G systems, only 2 I can remember ever = being over 20 Mbps (never 30 for me). Most of the time the 4G systems = are below 5Mbps. And very inconsistent during speed or throughput = tests. =20 > Where are you getting 30Mbps? I am VERY jealous!=20 San Jose bay area, NYC, Chicago, Seattle, Vancouver (BC), Los Angeles, = San Diego, Sacamento, Portland, Austin, and many others. The only place I=92ve gotten the poor performance you describe recently = has been Dallas and then only in a few locations like the airport and = parts of Richardson. Owen > =20 > Thanks > =20 > Mike > =20 > =20 > =20 > From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 4:50 PM > To: Bill Jouris > Cc: IPv6 Operations > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment > =20 > =20 > On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill Jouris = wrote: >=20 >=20 > I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem wired = connections. LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to struggle = in comparison to wired. > =20 > =20 > I=92m assuming that the wifi in hotels, conference centers, airports, = etc. is some form of wired connection as you describe behind it. My = performance problems generally don=92t seem to be the wifi, but the = wired connection behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is better = than if I had basic cable service, but I pay (a lot) extra for = middle-tier service on a business line (more than I pay for LTE as a = matter of fact) and it does, in fact, perform slightly better (LTE = 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps). > =20 > Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my Comcast uplink. > =20 > Owen >=20 >=20 > Bill Jouris > Inside Products, Inc. > www.insidethestack.com > 831-659-8360 > 925-855-9512 (direct) >=20 >=20 > From: Owen DeLong > To: Bill Jouris =20 > Cc: Gert Doering ; IPv6 Operations =20 > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 PM > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >=20 >=20 > How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many of the = wifi networks I encounter in my travels. > =20 > Owen > =20 > On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 AM, Bill Jouris = wrote: >=20 >=20 > "...just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6" > =20 > Fine, as far as it goes. There is, however, a little problem with = bandwidth using wireless vs wired. So while wireless may be great for = trying out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those = trying to get real work done. > =20 > Bill Jouris > Inside Products, Inc. > www.insidethestack.com > 831-659-8360 > 925-855-9512 (direct) >=20 >=20 > From: Gert Doering > To: Nalini Elkins =20 > Cc: IPv6 Operations =20 > Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 AM > Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment >=20 > Hi, >=20 > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because = migration > > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, = until IPv6 > > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling = overhead > > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. > >=20 > > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. > >=20 > > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just = starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not = even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. >=20 > Yeah, the US. "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right? >=20 > > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. >=20 > I tend to forget... >=20 > But then, the US has taken the lead as far as IPv6 in mobile networks > go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get native IPv6 :-) >=20 > Gert Doering > -- NetMaster > --=20 > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? >=20 > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. = Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > =20 > =20 >=20 > =20 >=20 > The information contained in this communication is highly confidential = and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you = are hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or = distribution of this information is prohibited. Please notify the = sender, by electronic mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and = delete the original message without making any copies. >=20 > Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan = are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross = and Blue Shield Association. >=20 --Apple-Mail=_C49209E6-B57D-4E56-A551-8CC9CFA50E27 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
On Mar 31, 2014, at 1:59 PM, = Ackermann, Michael <MAckermann@bcbsm.com> = wrote:

That sounds real good!    But = unfortunately for me does not match what I experience.    = More than 50% of the locations I have been in the past 6 months,  = are 3G.   Of the 4G systems, only 2  I can remember ever = being over 20 Mbps (never 30 for me).   Most of the time the = 4G systems are below 5Mbps.   And very inconsistent during = speed or throughput tests.  
Where are you getting = 30Mbps?    I am VERY = jealous! 

San = Jose bay area, NYC, Chicago, Seattle, Vancouver (BC), Los Angeles, San = Diego, Sacamento, Portland, Austin, and many = others.

The only place I=92ve gotten the poor = performance you describe recently has been Dallas and then only in a few = locations like the airport and parts of = Richardson.

Owen

 
Thanks
 
Mike
 
 
 
From: v6ops [mailto:v6ops-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Owen = DeLong
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 4:50 = PM
To: Bill = Jouris
Cc: IPv6 = Operations
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 = deployment
 
 
On = Mar 31, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> = wrote:


I was thinking of wireless vs, for example, cable modem = wired connections.  LTE may be better than WiFi, but still seems to = struggle in comparison to wired.
 
 
I=92m assuming that the wifi in hotels, conference centers, = airports, etc. is some form of wired connection as you describe behind = it. My performance problems generally don=92t seem to be the wifi, but = the wired connection behind it. Indeed, my LTE performance at home is = better than if I had basic cable service, but I pay (a lot) extra for = middle-tier service on a business line (more than I pay for LTE as a = matter of fact) and it does, in fact, perform slightly better (LTE = 30Mbps, Comcast 35-50Mbps).
 
Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my Comcast = uplink.
 
Owen


Bill Jouris
Inside = Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 = (direct)

From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> 
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>; IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> 
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 1:26 = PM
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 = deployment


How so? In most cases, my LTE connections are faster than many = of the wifi networks I encounter in my = travels.
 
Owen
 
On Mar 31, 2014, at 8:31 = AM, Bill Jouris <bill.jouris@insidethestack.com> = wrote:


"...just subscribe to verizon = LTE, get native IPv6"
 
Fine, as far = as it goes.  There is, however, a little problem with bandwidth = using wireless vs wired.  So while wireless may be great for trying = out IPv6, that still leaves some issues to be addressed by those trying = to get real work done.
 

Bill Jouris
Inside Products, Inc.
www.insidethestack.com
831-659-8360
925-855-9512 = (direct)

From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
To: Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> 
Cc: IPv6 Operations <v6ops@ietf.org> 
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 8:21 = AM
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 = deployment


Hi,

On Mon, Mar = 31, 2014 at 07:08:31AM -0700, Nalini Elkins wrote:
> On Mon, Mar = 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:
> > What if = we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration
> = > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until = IPv6
> > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, = IPv6 tunneling overhead
> > would affect the overall efficiency = and data delivery.
> 
> >The period for = tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.
> 
> You have got to be = kidding.   Most large enterprises are just starting to learn to = spell IPv6.  I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their = 5-year plan yet.  And these are MAJOR US corporations.

Yeah, = the US.  "We do not need IPv6, we have IPv4", right?

> = Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.

I = tend to forget...

But then, the US has taken the lead as far as = IPv6 in mobile networks
go - just subscribe to verizon LTE, get = native IPv6 :-)

Gert Doering
        -- = NetMaster
-- 
have= you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG    =                     = Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14    =       Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 = Muenchen                  = HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444    =       USt-IdNr.: = DE813185279

_______________________________________________
v6op= s mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing = list
v6ops@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
 

 

 

The information = contained in this communication is highly confidential and is intended = solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this communication is = directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified = that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of this = information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic mail = or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original message = without making any copies.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and = Blue Care Network of Michigan are nonprofit corporations and independent = licensees of the Blue Cross and Blue Shield = Association.


= --Apple-Mail=_C49209E6-B57D-4E56-A551-8CC9CFA50E27-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:22:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63691A6FD0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -109.511 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4jAdsCdXnmL4 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169BD1A6F87 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1651; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1396300931; x=1397510531; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=rW9swi483KJnLF1QsM5MFEbJ0921iw1TVbt7Jq35JZA=; b=mkkfblSIiPODXqZP8DVO58m/t/MzjjpuIk0wUXnogFNrd7ixVeiY8o2E VX1osmiVPbqWmrlYkGwiIonve6kJ8/qVkMflptaLTXuHBlg9IrcIWhrNG V3vAweuoCsMR9KKNQ+vgdoqO69L2h1EbO/7pmUlH7Fx7evT2FCYche+4l o=; X-Files: signature.asc : 195 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag8FAMPbOVOtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABZgwaBEsMvgSQWdIImAQEEgQkCAU4yJQIEIYdr0FMXjh0RAVeDJIEUBJBVgTSCWYNskjWDMIFyOQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,767,1389744000"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="31792856" Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 31 Mar 2014 21:22:10 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com [173.37.183.80]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s2VLMAlX003419 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:22:10 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x09.cisco.com ([169.254.9.247]) by xhc-rcd-x06.cisco.com ([173.37.183.80]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:22:10 -0500 From: "Fred Baker (fred)" To: IPv6 Operations Thread-Topic: Caution on discussion of individual services Thread-Index: AQHPTSdGCZNA5QLWm0G9cXZLRjfvzg== Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:22:09 +0000 Message-ID: <379A9A6A-61CA-4D23-BBA8-6564869C7D04@cisco.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> In-Reply-To: <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.19.64.115] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9145ECB5-10D9-40A5-A4E3-31473559CA3D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/QsjNLVFc9amElAocZgdDUJX0yjo Subject: [v6ops] Caution on discussion of individual services X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:22:16 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_9145ECB5-10D9-40A5-A4E3-31473559CA3D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 I=92m going to say something that my co-chair probably wishes he could = say, and can=92t because of his position. This working group is chartered to enable operators to talk with each = other, and others to talk with operators, and either write documents = that report on or improve the operational behavior of the IPv6 Internet, = or advise other working groups that they should. Generic statements = about networks and network operation are well in order, and reports of = success or failure (=93we got X going!=94 or =93we tried it, and Y = didn=92t work for reasons {Z}=94) are well in order. We are amused by, = and tolerate, exuberance. The recent diversion-of-a-thread re Comcast seemed a bit more like = =93going after a vendor of a service=94. I=92d suggest that if we want = to quiz an operator over his (or her) service, that=92s something to = take up with the operator in private email. Back to your regularly scheduled diatribes :-) --Apple-Mail=_9145ECB5-10D9-40A5-A4E3-31473559CA3D Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iD8DBQFTOdyCbjEdbHIsm0MRAlklAKCv1NSAIX2kwfjEcJvorYiXJFKjRwCeOx88 akI87/Q0BQUNQ6xFfpxy35M= =Is9e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_9145ECB5-10D9-40A5-A4E3-31473559CA3D-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:23:05 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 400991A702C for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:23:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.276 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.276 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MARKETING_PARTNERS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jc-6T_XbBS-f for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ve0-x229.google.com (mail-ve0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c01::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 694E81A701E for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ve0-f169.google.com with SMTP id pa12so9044996veb.28 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=reCibioMvE/M3NRPojtjg/fTcJj+QhPWqZUE0B9DyV0=; b=d1F/cyXk/Jc8FhH3Q2EJHATESFYHABngMyQMSR+qcuQlQ9OR7Q0bnHp6DvRCUVXJgM Ibkm9K1mvGSdzppCC4MbKw/QUt58vWuJ7n5pB1c5u7z+0xxkbrJFvvgt41AMasOvctzU zSEky6b+RWWLSmO0kfU9FsgBDrXhUj18dGLZRYScEIfaxQdRL6J3JzFjnkb3SLyEYKHm e7Q7sDmiwJMw7WdTOdfu2/CNPxqZmBvH0tBcw91sRz5Ct7Huky4Oot4UADmVc5moykv/ CeKe8y/F3yOU77DthD/6Sw/BlLrppPpROVUUPJJf31IvzKx04wtvPruz1vMq41yzoQCd nI5Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.220.163.3 with SMTP id y3mr25334854vcx.7.1396300975812; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:55 -0700 (PDT) Sender: nygren@gmail.com Received: by 10.221.18.70 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:22:55 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: rXJEgfpbL1bwD_xScT8LkGFIvsQ Message-ID: From: Erik Nygren To: Nalini Elkins Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133da66a9b63404f5eda7b1 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/rtFhSzIo2ZA-A6I9egK-YVACj64 Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:23:03 -0000 --001a1133da66a9b63404f5eda7b1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I'd encourage people who haven't looked at IPv6 deployment statistics recently to go and look at where we are now. Over the past year or so a number of the largest end-user networks in the U.S., Germany, and other parts of Europe have been actively rolling out *native* IPv6. Some reference points include: http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/ http://6lab.cisco.com/stats/ http://vyncke.org/ipv6status/compare.php?metric=p&countries=us,de,ch,be https://blogs.akamai.com/2014/03/ipv6-by-the-numbers-strong-growth-in-second-half-of-2013.html There are certainly ISPs that are way behind, but many at least do have plans in-flight and are waiting on the the pioneers to work through the issues with various vendors and hardware devices. For those doing active roll-outs, it is worth looking at some of the graphs at the worldipv6launch list above. Many are quietly rolling out IPv6 by city/market, so just because it doesn't exist in your city doesn't mean that it won't quietly be there soon. For content providers, native IPv6 connectivity is available in data centers all around the world (as well as from many CDNs and similar). For example, Akamai has been able to get working IPv6 from almost 500 network partners in over 1000 locations in 76 countries. So while there are certainly > Most large enterprises are just starting to learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say > it is not even in their 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. I've run into some of the same, and I think many of these people will be very surprised soon by the growth and will need to adjust those plans ASAP. One factor seems to be that after 15 years of "IPv6 any day now" assumptions are made that adoption is still like it was a few years ago (mostly tunnels, plus some native in smaller regions in Asia). However, now the reality is that many of the largest end-users in the world (in the US, Germany, and elsewhere) are done with trials and turning the activation crank. Erik On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Nalini Elkins < nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote: > > What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migration > > towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IPv6 > > completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling > overhead > > would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery. > > >The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so. > > You have got to be kidding. Most large enterprises are just starting to > learn to spell IPv6. I talk to quite few who say it is not even in their > 5-year plan yet. And these are MAJOR US corporations. > > At home, I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP or ANY > ISP without paying huge amounts of money. When our engineers do IPv6 > testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 tunneling. > > Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation. > > Thanks, > > Nalini Elkins > Inside Products, Inc. > (831) 659-8360 > www.insidethestack.com > > _______________________________________________ > v6ops mailing list > v6ops@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops > --001a1133da66a9b63404f5eda7b1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'd encourage people who haven't looked = at IPv6 deployment statistics recently to go and look at where we are now.= =A0 Over the past year or so a number of the largest end-user networks in t= he U.S., Germany, and other parts of Europe have been actively rolling out = *native*=A0 IPv6.=A0 Some reference points include:

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 http://www.worldipv6launch.org/measurements/
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0= http://6lab.cisco.com/stats/<= br>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 http://vyncke.org/ipv6status/compare.ph= p?metric=3Dp&countries=3Dus,de,ch,be
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 https://blogs.akamai.com/20= 14/03/ipv6-by-the-numbers-strong-growth-in-second-half-of-2013.html
=
There are certainly ISPs that are way behind, but many at least do hav= e plans in-flight and are waiting on the the pioneers to work through the i= ssues with various vendors and hardware devices.=A0 For those doing active = roll-outs, it is worth looking at some of the graphs at the worldipv6launch= list above.=A0 Many are quietly rolling out IPv6 by city/market, so just b= ecause it doesn't exist in your city doesn't mean that it won't= quietly be there soon.

For content providers, native IPv6 connectivity i= s available in data centers all around the world (as well as from many CDNs= and similar).=A0 For example, Akamai has been able to get working IPv6 fro= m almost 500 network partners in over 1000 locations in 76 countries.=A0 So= while there are certainly

> Most large enterprises are just starting=20 to learn to spell IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say
> it is not ev= en in=20 their 5-year plan yet. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations.

I've run into some of the same, and I think many of these people = will be very surprised soon by the growth and will need to adjust those pla= ns ASAP.=A0 One factor seems to be that after 15 years of "IPv6 any da= y now" assumptions are made that adoption is still like it was a few y= ears ago (mostly tunnels, plus some native in smaller regions in Asia).=A0 = However, now the reality is that many of the largest end-users in the world= (in the US, Germany, and elsewhere) are done with trials and turning the a= ctivation crank.

=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Erik




On M= on, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:08 AM, Nalini Elkins <nalini.elkins@i= nsidethestack.com> wrote:


On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 08:31:03AM +0500, Mohammad Aazam wrote:
> What if we first think about QoS provisioning in IPv6? Because migrati= on
> towards IPv6 would require tunneling for a reasonable period, until IP= v6
> completely takes over from IPv4. During that time, IPv6 tunneling over= head
> would affect the overall efficiency and data delivery.

>The period for tunneling was... uh... 1997 to 2000, or so.

You have got to be kidding. =A0 Most large enterprises are just start= ing to learn to spell IPv6. =A0I talk to quite few who say it is not even i= n their 5-year plan yet. =A0And these are MAJOR US corporations.

At home,=A0I certainly can't get IPv6 native connectivity from my ISP o= r ANY ISP without paying huge amounts of money. =A0 When our engineers do I= Pv6 testing over the Internet we use IPv4 / IPv6 =A0tunneling.

Just trying to inject a little reality into the conversation.

Thanks,

Nalini Elkins
Inside Products, Inc.
(831) 659-8360<= /a>
www.insidethest= ack.com

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@ietf.org
h= ttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

--001a1133da66a9b63404f5eda7b1-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:34:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C432B1A6F66 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:34:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m8Cqy00wGXl1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:34:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nm12-vm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (nm12-vm6.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [216.39.63.160]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6EFA1A0789 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [216.39.60.168] by nm12.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 21:34:41 -0000 Received: from [216.39.60.242] by tm4.access.bullet.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 21:34:41 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1013.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 31 Mar 2014 21:34:41 -0000 X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 680597.46293.bm@omp1013.access.mail.gq1.yahoo.com Received: (qmail 95107 invoked by uid 60001); 31 Mar 2014 21:34:40 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1396301680; bh=8YAs+huELvZyEzKiRI8adYDqOswcnZiRYq50j+nTxEY=; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Rocket-MIMEInfo:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=DtltAvgu8Br9QMkwX8CzpF+q+dilKM1xd2pNbvhpSreUScaOoVA2S6Nv5sABh8QkGdRTR7icPAO9ngslYujhrFWSFb27W5dY+rjxFFUfFJ9ZVntNoy73ZYgPtjxsAq6dQd2aVNPRnIoZI0bCVPU8WAGr2yp3odPeaZYfmpAlrJg= X-YMail-OSG: JPD_XbEVM1l9jAj44qFtkJFz.fM7VpeA6NrSN3LFsP50PAh xquim85j9SkOj2Fa6EJZdXzwQpJmLrZ3QKWdX6uzWPwHBm6xGg.DDwXd1Gv_ _M8AMa9wtHMRkjj2be7TcI4r31JR75WlFEwGBtnuq2XFArZhtqTnRi.4YuNx T0ZQArSgBixROp4Uh.DZzwXzx3cYTsAxw_nF7PFlhEQocDhp85bxpopoL7eE mwkm.2cz6PvGSE1uWQ1U_5wnajKXTzY4vtXnp2Jg8cFZLTS5chck1vVuX0JB rh02lkyNcoN1KEvYlq.xhbxAmPgKhEUvn9GqwzzyHD76j..mcQIl9XjrPnEN V.2.XR.kPTwpm_Dn2w1nytyOFN4tavekLtfwAIqAfeS0jtfxEopkWUbvVFQU oKXx3ZygTfXHXJopqv5TJmr0g9t49BLEp3p0GYJp5sEG4Ny5rSkVAZigOoMA 4MZiDOQuaFoRzI1ttcEVpalbrjYoNQv4T6R.KgLRgGaWHxzGtn3HZzzt2OaY 9U6PkRYXZpAs6I0nG3.JVxvfEeHpgpu5w0Mc1x0eHKwBfWwGE1Cd7G57TvwR vz4ZffeU1D1l0kSmrkGh8avS_qh8pZF3vlC3gd3EKwnyNRGP88Qddx2oEskR b Received: from [24.130.37.147] by web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:34:40 PDT X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, R3V5cywKCkpvaG4gQnJ6b3pvd3NraSBvZiBDb21jYXN0IGhhcyBiZWVuIEVYVFJFTUVMWSBoZWxwZnVsICYgZmVlbHMgdGhhdCBpbmRlZWQgbXkgYXJlYSBET0VTIGhhdmUgSVB2NiBzZXJ2aWNlLiDCoCBJIHdpbGwgaGF2ZSB0byBwaHlzaWNhbGx5IGdvIHRvIG15IGxvY2FsIG9mZmljZSB3aXRoIHRoZSBtb2RlbSAmIHNlZSB3aGF0IEkgaGF2ZSB0byBkby4KTWF5IGhhdmUgdG8gc3dhcCBvdXQgdGhlIGVxdWlwbWVudC4KClVuZm9ydHVuYXRlbHksIGl0IHdpbGwgdGFrZSBtZSBhIGRheSBvciB0d28gdG8gZ2UBMAEBAQE- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.181.645 References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> Message-ID: <1396301680.57607.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:34:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Nalini Elkins To: IPv6 Operations In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="36908767-483440291-1396301680=:57607" Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/FGLJ1mURTmgeVJlOsz3Bw3dQsJM Subject: [v6ops] Comcast IPv6 X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Nalini Elkins List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:34:47 -0000 --36908767-483440291-1396301680=:57607 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Guys,=0A=0AJohn Brzozowski of Comcast has been EXTREMELY helpful & feels th= at indeed my area DOES have IPv6 service. =A0 I will have to physically go = to my local office with the modem & see what I have to do.=0AMay have to sw= ap out the equipment.=0A=0AUnfortunately, it will take me a day or two to g= et to this because I have to actually do my day job!=0A=0AThanks very much,= John!=0A=A0=0AWill report back on my progress.=0A=0ANalini Elkins=0AInside= Products, Inc.=0A(831) 659-8360=0Awww.insidethestack.com --36908767-483440291-1396301680=:57607 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Guys,
=
John Brzozowski of Comcast has been EXTREMELY helpful &= amp; feels that indeed my area DOES have IPv6 service.   I will have t= o physically go to my local office with the modem & see what I have to = do.
May have to swap out the equipment.

=
Unfortunately, it will take me a day or two to get to this = because I have to actually do my day job!

<= div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 16px; font-family: arial, helv= etica, sans-serif; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;">Thanks very much, John!
 
Will= report back on my progress.

Nalini Elkins
Insi= de Products, Inc.
(831) 659-8360
www.insidethestack.com

=
 
--36908767-483440291-1396301680=:57607-- From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:45:09 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1EDE1A6FD0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:45:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.91 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cwbu9cU7gLk1 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shell-too.nominum.com (shell-too.nominum.com [64.89.228.229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F991A08D8 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:45:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from archivist.nominum.com (archivist.nominum.com [64.89.228.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by shell-too.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22EC61B83C6 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-02.win.nominum.com [64.89.228.132]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by archivist.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0566C190043; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:45:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.10.40] (192.168.1.10) by CAS-02.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:44:59 -0700 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) From: Ted Lemon In-Reply-To: <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:44:56 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20140331152106.GP43641@Space.Net> <1396279872.93301.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <50676C37-3141-4753-A459-D0972322732E@delong.com> <1396298483.14394.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <61171EEF-5E8B-48C8-9671-1AB91DBD8931@delong.com> To: Owen DeLong X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) X-Originating-IP: [192.168.1.10] Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/pb3YuJkq-U3DyGrbeZxWDGtWVXI Cc: IPv6 Operations Subject: Re: [v6ops] Facebook v6 deployment X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:45:06 -0000 On Mar 31, 2014, at 4:49 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > Often, my LTE uplink performs better than my Comcast uplink. Mine does too, but Comcast doesn't bill by the gigabyte. This is = getting _really_ offtopic. From nobody Mon Mar 31 14:47:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAD681A6F66 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.189 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.189 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_FSL_HELO_BARE_IP_2=0.01] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uhV43sVv2uQk for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.z120.zixworks.com (mx.z120.zixworks.com [199.30.235.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74B7B1A6FB2 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) by Outbound.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id BC04B28203B for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:47:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva2.bcbsm.com (unknown [12.107.172.81]) by mx.z120.zixworks.com (Proprietary) with SMTP id 2D28E282036; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 16:47:47 -0500 (CDT) Received: from imsva2.bcbsm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA80 (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC0BF2F004A; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:30:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pwn401ea100.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (unknown [10.64.80.217]) by imsva2.bcbsm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8B662F0045; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:30:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PWN401EA105.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (10.64.102.241) by PWN401EA100.ent.corp.bcbsm.com (10.64.80.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.438.0; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:47:44 -0400 Received: from PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::fdcb:603d:469e:b1db]) by PWN401EA105.ent.corp.bcbsm.com ([fe80::f13e:83e4:1dae:5345%10]) with mapi id 14.01.0438.000; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:47:44 -0400 From: "Ackermann, Michael" To: Nalini Elkins , IPv6 Operations Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Comcast IPv6 Thread-Index: AQHPTSkNQv4LlHb2dkupEXOgRke0gpr7uznw Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:47:43 +0000 Message-ID: <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B6E6@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> References: <532C6E10.1040209@gmail.com> <20140331113541.GL43641@Space.Net> <1396274911.84934.YahooMailNeo@web2804.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A958356-CDB7-442F-8440-D775476A3909@lists.zabbadoz.net> <1396277061.74347.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1396277948.18387.YahooMailNeo@web2802.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B201@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> <4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B595@PWN401EA160.ent.corp.bcbsm.com> <1396301680.57607.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1396301680.57607.YahooMailNeo@web2801.biz.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.64.10.35] x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.500.1017-20602.002 x-tm-as-result: No--53.530600-8.000000-31 x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B6E6PWN401EA160entc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-VPM-MSG-ID: 28d30997-b021-47ad-9e69-290652be0132 X-VPM-HOST: vmvpm02.z120.zixworks.com X-VPM-GROUP-ID: 8946e2a3-89cc-4581-b865-27dab85a69f4 X-VPM-ENC-REGIME: Plaintext X-VPM-CERT-FLAG: 0 X-VPM-IS-HYBRID: 0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/jnEeYNm8hehDqUqOjgqVkavy_6Y Subject: Re: [v6ops] Comcast IPv6 X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: v6ops discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:47:55 -0000 --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B6E6PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Echoing=21 John has helped several of us OFF LIST and his efforts are GREATLY = appreciated=21 Thanks JOHN=21 From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Nalini Elkins Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 5:35 PM To: IPv6 Operations Subject: =5Bv6ops=5D Comcast IPv6 Guys, John Brzozowski of Comcast has been EXTREMELY helpful & feels that indeed = my area DOES have IPv6 service. I will have to physically go to my local = office with the modem & see what I have to do. May have to swap out the equipment. Unfortunately, it will take me a day or two to get to this because I have = to actually do my day job=21 Thanks very much, John=21 Will report back on my progress. Nalini Elkins Inside Products, Inc. (831) 659-8360 www.insidethestack.com The information contained in this communication is highly confidential and = is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies. =20 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan are = nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association. --_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B6E6PWN401EA160entc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D--><=21--=5Bif gte mso 9=5D> <=21=5Bendif=5D-->

Echoing=21

 

John has helped several of us OFF LIST and his = efforts are GREATLY appreciated=21

 

Thanks JOHN=21

 

 

 

From: v6ops =5Bmailto:v6ops-bounces=40ietf.org=5D On Behalf Of Nalini Elkins
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2014 5:35 PM
To: IPv6 Operations
Subject: =5Bv6ops=5D Comcast IPv6

 

Guys,

 

John Brzozowski of Comcast has been EXTREMELY helpful & feels that = indeed my area DOES have IPv6 service.   I will have to physically go = to my local office with the modem & see what I have to do.

May have to swap out the equipment.

 

Unfortunately, it will take me a day or two to get to this because I = have to actually do my day job=21

 

Thanks very much, John=21

 

Will report back on my progress.

 

Nalini Elkins
Inside Products, Inc.
(831) 659-8360
www.insidethestack.com<= /o:p>

 

 


The information contained in this communication is highly confidential = and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom this = communication is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are = hereby notified that any viewing, copying, disclosure or distribution of = this information is prohibited. Please notify the sender, by electronic = mail or telephone, of any unintended receipt and delete the original = message without making any copies.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and Blue Care Network of Michigan = are nonprofit corporations and independent licensees of the Blue Cross and = Blue Shield Association.

--_000_4FC37E442D05A748896589E468752CAA0CB6B6E6PWN401EA160entc_--