- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

ULA Registry
by Jeroen Massar 29 May '07

29 May '07

[Major cross post, set reply-to to NANOG, please honor it... ] [Note: I am not talking about ULA Central here, though it could apply] To stop the pesky emails about ULA, I hereby present a (partial) solution to this problem. We have ULA as per RFC4193. With a little math one can generate a ULA prefix sized /48 which is most likely globally unique. According to the RFC with 10.000 connections the collision probability is still a huge 4.54*10^-05. Some people have expressed a problem with this, especially when they want to use the generated ULA prefix for their large organization. The simple, cheap and quick solution: a ULA registry. This comes close to ULA-Central, but what we do is simply make a list of the "in use" ULA's, without any allocation policies whatsoever except: first come first serve and no cash to pay. The tool is here: http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/ula/ The page allows one to generate a ULA based on a given MAC address (multicast + locally defined + unregistered are not accepted) and then register it. The Name + Email are mandatory to restrict abuse a little bit. Email is not shown, except in whois and can be used to possible contact people who are leaking ULA prefixes. Note, it is indeed a _partial_ solution. When somebody still generates the same ULA prefix and does not check the list you can still collide. As this is primarily a problem for big organizations, they should be checking this list for collisions and registering their prefix when they see that they have a need for that. The list is available from the website, but also per whois.sixxs.net which is now serving up fd00::/8. It does not cover ULA-C (fc00::/8). As SixXS is a private hobbyproject kind of thing, we of course are not liable for anything that this might cause to you, your family, company etc. But enjoy it nevertheless. Full copies of the list in inet6num format are available from the site. Greets, Jeroen PS: GRH still classifies ULA's as "BAD" of course PPS: Thanks to Peter van Dijk for the multicast/locally defined MACs PPPS: Folks registering prefixes like crazy will nicely get locked out automatically, so don't even try... PPPPS: Thanks to SUZUKI Shinsuke and Holger Zuleger for the generator.

1 0

RE: IPv6 Advertisements
by Azinger, Marla 29 May '07

29 May '07

/48's handed out by ARIN are most likely in the PI range that ARIN has deamed for PI use only. Networks are aware of the PI block and have opened their filters to let /48 or more specific through if and only if it comes from the special IP block. That said...not everyone is letting more specific than a /32 through no matter what IP block it comes from. ~Marla -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Donald Stahl Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 6:26 AM To: Pekka Savola Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 Advertisements > Anything more specific than /32 is going to be filtered at some portion of > the ISPs whether for the good or bad. There are some subsets of the v6 > address space that have a higher chance of /48 working (for some definition > of 'working') than other parts of the address space, though. More specific advertisements always stand a chance of being blocked. I was more interested in whether or not people know of places where they are actively being blocked and why. That said- ARIN is handing out /48's- should we be blocking validly assigned networks? -Don

1 0

Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
by William B. Norton 29 May '07

29 May '07

On 5/29/07, John Curran <jcurran(a)istaff.org> wrote: : : > P.S. I'm not at this NANOG, and it's probably too late > to round up presentations, but what might be > really helpful to most folks would be presentations > which cover some or most aspects (getting transit, > address planning, routing, firewall, DNS/DHCP) of > dropping IPv6 into existing IPv4 service providers > with destroying today's production services by > accident. Real world experience is preferred over Thanks for the thoughtful post John. Along these lines, we have some time during the Peering BOF at the upcoming NANOG in Bellevue if there are folks that can speak to + operational experiences peering IPv6 traffic, + maybe some gotchas, + lessons learned types of things. For a BOF we don't need formal slides, approvals, etc. just folks willing to share their experiences with the group in 2-5 minutes... Send me email if you are interested. Bill

1 0

wiki
by Randy Bush 29 May '07

29 May '07

i hope folk are aware of the meeting wiki, thanks to cluepon http://nanog.cluepon.net/index.php/NANOG_40 and folk looking to save money by sharing a room, http://nanog.cluepon.net/index.php/NANOG40_Roommates_Wanted randy

1 0

APOPS / SANOG X Call for papers
by Gaurab Raj Upadhaya 28 May '07

28 May '07

Hello, The call for papers for the joint SANOG / APOPS and APNIC member's meeting is here. Submission on interesting topics relevant to operators are welcome. Cfp and submission guidelines are available at. http://www.sanog.org/sanog10/cfp.htm Being the first combined meeting between SANOG and APNIC, larger audience is expected. Event will be held in first week of September in New Delhi, India. thanks - gaurab ====== SANOG X / APOPS / APNIC 24 29 August - 7 September 2007, New Delhi Call for Papers Deadline for proposals : 15 July, 2007 Acceptance Notification: 30 July, 2007 Paper Confirmation : 15 August ,2007 The following is an open call for papers/presentations for the two-day conference and two days of tutorials. Presentations are expected to be 20-30 minutes long with technical content. Marketing and sales content in presentations is against the spirit of the SANOG / APOPS/ APNIC and is strictly prohibited. Please respond to this call for papers/presentations by submitting it online at http://submission.sanog.org/paper/user/login.php?event=4 The conference will consist of 8 sessions, including the plenaries, over two days. The tracks are open for general ideas, and feel free to propose talks that you think are relevant to the operational and Internet research community. The topics given below are not exclusive. - Prevention and mitigation of Denial of Service attacks including intrusion, spam etc. - Routing policies and architecture for scalable IP and broadband networks - Internet Exchange Points Operations - Peering Techniques and Policies - BGP Multihoming Techniques - Technology updates and trends in security and routing - MPLS and QoS implementation experiences - Traffic management and measurement - Network migration issues (IPv4 to v6, Layer 2 to IP etc.) - Voice and Multimedia over IP - Managed network services including Security and VPNs - Mail servers, SPAM prevention, - Wireless Technology and Applications - Regional updates This is an open invitation for for updates on issues relevant to network operators. This has generally included updates from Internet exchanges, APNIC, routing table updates and such information that would be useful to the community. You are also welcome to submit proposals for BoFs. on Behalf of the APNIC 24 / APOPS and SANOG X Programme Committee

1 0

Re: Moving to IPv6 (Was: NANOG 40 agenda posted)
by Brandon Butterworth 27 May '07

27 May '07

> > Because for IPv6 to be useful to the masses, content is required. Indeed. I'd hoped there would be time to finish the multicast project first. I'll kick off getting BBC content up on v6 > The really big problem is that > there is a case that when you do enable AAAA's on your service that > suddenly there is a possibility that some user can't reach your site > properly anymore as they don't have proper connectivity to your site > over IPv6. I'll start with a stand alone site that users elect to visit while testing When it goes on the main site it'll probably be a peers only service which they can opt into (as we use DNS LB we can return AAAA only to participating ISPs) if they are ready to handle the user support needed > > It occurs to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, but in your model of this > > transition there becomes little benefit to moving customers to IPv6 at > > all if being stuffed behind a v4 NAT or HTTP proxies counts as "Internet > > connectivity". Plenty of people think Internet connectivity = HTTP and are happy in their little world > They get the benefit of using IPv6 and thus full end to end > connectivity for all their hosts, instead of receiving only 1 single > IPv4 address. I see that as a real improvement, and it is a model that > a lot of people are very happy with in using. But one not to be assumed. It's unlikely we'll give end to end access to the corporate wan. It's also unlikely we'll bother with v6 there for some time as 25K users behind a few NAT firewalls is fine. brandon

2 1

Rushing into IPv6 Operational Problems? [Was: Re: NANOG 40 agenda post ed]
by Fergie 27 May '07

27 May '07

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 - -- "Chris L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow(a)verizonbusiness.com> wrote: >On Sat, 26 May 2007, Martin Hannigan wrote: > >> >> I would urge potential sponsors to insist that V6 is on the agenda as >> a condition of funding, both meeting sponsors and Beer 'N Gear. > >it is possible that vendors might not want that story told on their >behalf... there are still a significant number of vendors without any >story for v6 :( (without a reasonable story I'd say) > For what it's worth, I won't be at the next NANOG -- it falls at the same time as MAAWG, and I already had planned to be there to give an invited technical presentation. I will try to be at the next one in Albuquerque, though... Having said that, I would be interested to hear the NANOG community input on two particular topics: [1] The results of the "Report from the IAB Workshop on Routing and Addressing", and it's effect on IPv6 multihoming on the Internet routing system, and; [2] Vince Fuller's statistics that he has presented several times in several different venues. [1] http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~lixia/draft-iab-raws-report.txt [2] http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/routingandaddressing/vaf-iab-raws.pdf I think before people start rushing off to deploy v6, there are some serious issues that need to be addressed, regardless of v4 resource exhaustion. - - ferg p.s. If there are newer versions of the above two documents available, mea culpa -- these should at least illustrate my point... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.6.1 (Build 1012) wj8DBQFGWODaq1pz9mNUZTMRAsl2AKDmQEMlDsfhio4fQ9hPEbiafTSmhwCfSm0i hk/MlzMHFJj/FS090gVGpE4= =aOC6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawg(at)netzero.net ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/

1 0

Re: Interesting new dns failures
by Scott Weeks 26 May '07

26 May '07

--- ops.lists(a)gmail.com wrote: From: "Suresh Ramasubramanian" <ops.lists(a)gmail.com> On 5/26/07, Scott Weeks <surfer(a)mauigateway.com> wrote: > --------------johnl(a)iecc.com wrote:-------------------- > > the bits of governments that deal with online crime, spam, etc., > > I can report that pretty much all of the countries that matter > > realize there's a problem, and a lot of them have passed or will > > pass laws whether we like it or not. So it behooves us to engage > > them and help them pass better rather than worse laws. > > Which countries are "pretty much all of the countries that matter"? Do you have > a list or is this just 'something you're sure of'? Quite a long list. http://www.londonactionplan.net/?q=node/5 ------------------------------------------------------------ I see 24 countries. Did I miss something? scott

1 0

Re: Interesting new dns failures
by Scott Weeks 26 May '07

26 May '07

--------------johnl(a)iecc.com wrote:-------------------- > the bits of governments that deal with online crime, spam, etc., > I can report that pretty much all of the countries that matter > realize there's a problem, and a lot of them have passed or will > pass laws whether we like it or not. So it behooves us to engage > them and help them pass better rather than worse laws. ---------------------------------------------------------- Which countries are "pretty much all of the countries that matter"? Do you have a list or is this just 'something you're sure of'? scott

5 6

Re: Interesting new dns failures
by Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu 26 May '07

26 May '07

On Mon, 21 May 2007 10:38:56 -0000, bmanning(a)karoshi.com said: > if you can get concensus to remove .com, i'm sure the roots would > be willing to help out. Whose bright idea *was* it to design a tree-hierarchical structure, and then dump essentially all 140 million entries under the same node, anyhow? :) I'll bet a large pizza that 90% or more could be relocated to a more appropriate location in the DNS tree, and nobody except the domain holder and less than a dozen other people will notice/care in the slightest. Now if anybody has a good idea on what to do with those companies that register www.thissummersblockbustermoviecomingsoonnow.com ;)

10 15