[AusNOG] IPv6
Paul Brooks
pbrooks-ausnog at layer10.com.au
Fri Mar 27 00:36:46 EST 2015
FFS is it 2008 all over again? This same sort of advice made the rounds in 2008,
2009, 2010....check the archives.
Still good advice - but clearly few bothered.
The thread starting at http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/2013-March/017219.html
has some sound advice.
As to why CGNAT is not the solution - read
http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/2010-October/008535.html thread through
again. Doesn't matter how much you squeeze IPv4, you won't connect to IPv6-only sites,
and they'll not connect to yours.
On 27/03/2015 12:11 AM, Russell Langton wrote:
> Hi Chris,
> In my personal opinion....
>
> You make alot of good points about Ipv6,especially about the backward compatibility
> but there is no much point talking about it now - that bus has already passed.
>
> Everyone's networks are different so we are all going to have different way to
> approach Ipv6 - For some this will be CGNAT, for some this will be native IPv6, some
> this will 6rd, some this will be 464SLAT, and some will stick their heads in the sand.
>
> The main aim of everybody is happy 'paying' users with happy eyeballs and growing
> customers.
> I know my in-laws use Ipv6 on NBN without even knowing or caring - They just care
> they can get to google/facebook which are 100% Ipv6 traffic.
>
> The realistic options are Ipv6 deployment in some form or another. That's it.
>
> This doesn't have to be a massive project with hundreds of people done in 1 month -
> It's a process not a leap.
> Ipv4 is not going to be turned off tomorrow as Noel highlighted.
>
> For starters, audit your devices - do they support Ipv6 now or need an upgrade.
> Flag it for next software upgrade if needed.
> The next step - Speak to your upstream and get a Ipv6 bgp peering happening.
> Next speak to your provider to get an allocation, or speak to apnic to get a ipv6
> allocation.
> Start working your way out from your edge/core devices to enable Ipv6 and establish
> a deployment plan.
> Mandate that any new service should be Ipv6 enabled where possible as well to save
> going backwards.
> At this point - you are well on the way to a Ipv6 deployment with minimal OPEX/CAPEX
> investment.
> Trust me, Everyone is going to have problems with a ipv6 deployment with varying
> degrees of difficulty but that's what vendor support is for and ausnog to see if
> anyone else has found a way to get that square peg in that round hole ;)
>
> Next, Look at getting http://minopher.net.au enabled for Ipv6. ;)
>
> The Ipv6 preparation and audit work will ensure that when the time does come for
> Ipv6 only websites, consumers/companies are not complaining - Why can't I access
> this porn website/service, and they are not changing providers because you can't fix
> it in a couple of days as your CGNAT solution ran out of IPs need a total ipv6
> deployment.
>
> Also with NBN - It's the perfect business case opportunity in a company to establish
> that any NBN connections should be fully dual-stacked.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Chris Hurley <chris at minopher.net.au
> <mailto:chris at minopher.net.au>> wrote:
>
> I could be wrong (and I have been before ;-), but the biggest mistake in IP6 was
> not making it backward compatible with IP4. Hence the resistance to take it up.
>
> Yes there are some good technical agruements with substance as to why we should
> make the quantum leap. But they forget the human lag factor. I.e it's not broken
> don't fix, It costs money, where's my return etc.
>
> That being said and the fact we have now "exhausted" IP4 addresses, what are the
> realistic options? Bare in mind consumers/companies only really care about "Do I
> have internet access". They neither know or care about the IP. They just want
> their porn, don't laugh. Given the number of outside hours clients trying to get
> support all to true.
>
> Personally I thought the NBN was the perfect vehicle to mandate IP6, but the
> powers that be said you can run what ever you like eg AppleTalk for all we care.
> Seriously you want 21st Century tech but prepared to run old technology.
>
> Mind you people have been talking about this issue for many years.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris Hurley BE (Elec), MBA
> Director
>
>
> ******************************************************
> Minopher Pty Ltd Phone: 1300 730 531
> 15 Nevana Street Fax: +61-3-9763 3309 <tel:%2B61-3-9763%203309>
> Scoresby, 3179 Victoria
> Australia
> ******************************************************
>
>
> From: Michael Biber <mbiber at ipv6forum.com.au <mailto:mbiber at ipv6forum.com.au>>
> Organization: IPv6 Forum Australia
> Reply-To: <mbiber at ipv6forum.com.au <mailto:mbiber at ipv6forum.com.au>>
> Date: Thursday, 26 March 2015 1:53 PM
> To: "'Beeson, Ayden'" <ABeeson at csu.edu.au <mailto:ABeeson at csu.edu.au>>,
> <kris at cloudcentral.com.au <mailto:kris at cloudcentral.com.au>>,
> "ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>"
> <ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>>
> Subject: Re: [AusNOG] Data Retention and CGNAT - educational exercise
>
> Here’s a list of IPv6 Only web sites.
>
> http://ipv6.cybernode.com/list-of-ipv6-only-sites
>
> It’s only reachable via IPv6 though 8^)
>
>
>
> I was told there are Indian government web sites and gaming servers that are
> only reachable via v6 but I can’t verify that. Also quite a few dark sites I
> imagine.
>
> Most everything is dual stacked.
>
>
>
> Mike Biber
>
> IPv6now
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Beeson, Ayden
> *Sent:* Thursday, 26 March 2015 9:58 AM
> *To:* 'kris at cloudcentral.com.au <mailto:%27kris at cloudcentral.com.au>';
> 'ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:%27ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>'
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Data Retention and CGNAT - educational exercise
>
>
>
> (Disclaimer: Apologies, I’m going to be “that guy” and argue against that line.
> Don’t take this email as a flame, it’s more about correcting a misconception
> that seems to be quite prevalent and I understand there are a lot of factors
> that go into deploying / not deploying IPv6 now that I will not cover.)
>
>
>
> That statement is part of the problem IMHO and I’ve seen it multiple times on
> this list and elsewhere.
>
>
>
> IPv6 won’t go anywhere until the majority get it turned on. It has no direct
> technical relation to IPv4 other than being the replacement for it. Blaming a
> lack of IPv6 deployment progress on “IPv4 not being broken yet” is
> self-defeating, it’s the same as saying “my water pipes still work even though
> they have a few big cracks leaking, why should the council replace them until
> the water completely stops flowing?” or “nobody else bothers to put rubbish in a
> bin, so I won’t either, plus I invented this new thing to add onto my shoes to
> make me higher to keep out of all the litter on the ground, everybody else needs
> to buy some now too”
>
>
>
> Unfortunately CGNAT is now a requirement for a lot of companies, due in large
> part to a lack of progress on IPv6, but it doesn’t go both ways. But as has been
> said before, most users don’t understand or care how their internet connection
> works, just that it does, so the onus is on the ISP’s etc. to push these things
> along for the benefit of everybody. Again as has been said, there is very little
> commercial incentive to do this, but it’s really going to be minimal capex to
> implement with very little additional opex spending so it shouldn’t be as big a
> cost issue as it may seem, at least for basic connectivity for servers etc.
>
>
>
> Obviously we can’t argue “don’t do CGNAT” now, we are well past that, but I
> would say that anybody looking at or doing CGNAT should at least have an IPv6
> deployment plan they are actively progressing, even if it’s slowly.
>
>
>
> The problem with IPv4 is that we can continue to do CGNAT theoretically
> indefinitely, though the logging required will continue to increase and the port
> ranges that are allowed for per user will continue to shrink until it becomes
> practically untenable. The issue is in the meantime we are stifling innovation
> and strangling available uses for the internet. In the next few years we will
> see a continued explosion of devices that will need IPv6 to be able to truly be
> used to their full potential, but a lot of those will just continue to not work
> or be underutilised until the network under them has the capacity to handle them
> gracefully.
>
>
>
> On the topic of IPv6 only hosts, I have heard there are ISP’s in China and
> Europe that are doing this but I have nothing concrete, anybody know if that’s
> fact or not / have a link? I suspect given I can’t find any info at all it’s not
> real, but I’d be interested to know…
>
>
>
> TL;DR – IPv6 only works when everybody does IPv6, do CGNAT if you have to, but
> make it clear to your management (or to yourself) that’s it’s not a long term
> strategy and make sure you have some sort of IPv6 plan being worked on for
> everybody’s sake.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ayden Beeson/ /
>
>
>
> *From:*AusNOG [mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] *On Behalf Of *Kristoffer
> Sheather @ CloudCentral
> *Sent:* Thursday, 26 March 2015 8:50 AM
> *To:* ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] Data Retention and CGNAT - educational exercise
>
>
>
> IPv6 won't go anywhere until IPv4 doesn't work anymore. That day is not today
> despite the numerous arguments and flames I expect to receive subsequent to this
> message.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Kristoffer Sheather
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From*: "Scott Weeks" <surfer at mauigateway.com <mailto:surfer at mauigateway.com>>
> *Sent*: Thursday, March 26, 2015 8:42 AM
> *To*: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:ausnog at lists.ausnog.net>
> *Subject*: Re: [AusNOG] Data Retention and CGNAT - educational exercise
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Reduce the amount of data to zero - put this energy into
> > deploying IPv6 instead of CG-NAT. You know you should.
> > You know you can.
>
>
> :: Oh boy, I am so sick of people harping on like this. I
> :: challenge you to run one single internet customer IPv6
> :: only (no translations) and see how long it lasts. Just
>
>
> Dual stack is not doable? I thought that's what he meant
> by deploy IPv6. Maybe I need more beer? Again? ;-)
>
> scott
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
> Charles Sturt University <http://www.csu.edu.au/>
>
> | ALBURY-WODONGA | BATHURST | CANBERRA | DUBBO | GOULBURN | MELBOURNE | ONTARIO | ORANGE | PORT
> MACQUARIE | SYDNEY | WAGGA WAGGA |
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *LEGAL NOTICE*
> This email (and any attachment) is confidential and is intended for the use of
> the addressee(s) only. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you
> must not copy, distribute, take any action in reliance on it or disclose it to
> anyone. Any confidentiality is not waived or lost by reason of mistaken
> delivery. Email should be checked for viruses and defects before opening.
> Charles Sturt University (CSU) does not accept liability for viruses or any
> consequence which arise as a result of this email transmission. Email
> communications with CSU may be subject to automated email filtering, which could
> result in the delay or deletion of a legitimate email before it is read at CSU.
> The views expressed in this email are not necessarily those of CSU.
>
> Charles Sturt University in Australia <http://www.csu.edu.au> The Grange
> Chancellery, Panorama Avenue, Bathurst NSW Australia 2795 (ABN: 83 878 708 551;
> CRICOS Provider Number: 00005F (National)). TEQSA Provider Number: PV12018
> Charles Sturt University in Ontario <http://www.charlessturt.ca/> 860 Harrington
> Court, Burlington Ontario Canada L7N 3N4 Registration: www.peqab.ca
> <http://www.peqab.ca>
>
> Consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150327/ec9ad8da/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 7102 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20150327/ec9ad8da/attachment.png>
More information about the AusNOG
mailing list