Marty,

I am not quibbling, but I did not recommend IPal but suggested that that DJ look at the IA web site at IPal because of the question he posed.

 "Anyone have any experience with software that will track both IPv4 and IPv6 assignments in the OSS world? Any recommendations?

While at EBS as the Director of Network Engineering we had copies of VitalQIP running including the DNS and DHCP portions. IPal a next generation IPAM does not compete with QIP buts sits in front of it with its IP Address Lifecycle Model with Engineered IP Addresses. IPal can drive both IPAM, DHCP and DNS vendors software such as QIP and other vendors supporting multiple complete v4, v6 and ASN space under management, any size block allocation with multiple allocation algorithms including /64 EUI-64 and random. It supports multiple vendors IPAM, DHCP and DNS from one version of software.

You are on the NANOG mailing list committee and I was trying to be very careful in my wording not to cross over the line into sales and marketing activities on a technical list. Having known Dorn Hetzel and Randy Bush for over twenty years and having been on this list for a number of years, I assumed you knew my affiliation with IA and I use my personal business e-mail account not my "official" IA account even though IA does several network engineering projects with high performance optical and IP networks. (We need to meet at the next beer and gear.)

IA was started in 2002 because of a lack of complete IP address life cycle solutions since only point tools that did some IPAM, DNS and DHCP were available. IPal was introduced in 2003 at an AFCEA conference supporting v4, v6 and ASN aggregate trees, multiple routing domains. Engineered IP Addresses are valid CIDR addresses that are unique within a given routing domain. The IP Address Lifecycle Model was developed to support allocation, assignment, aggregation, automatic reclamation of IP space while maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the Engineered IP Addresses. There are several patents awarded and multiple ones pending in NA, Europe and Asia for this next generation technology. IPals patent pending technology allows organization to manage multiple complete v4 domains with multiple RFC1918 space and multiple complete v6 domains supporting equipment, connections (circuits and LANs i.e. point to point or multi-point) with bi-directional XML/SOAP interfaces connecting to OSS, NMS, IDS and IPS systems. IPal is currently the only solution that US Government agencies are using to develop their v6 address plans to meet the June 2008 deadline for passing v6 traffic on their backbones.

Best Regards,

John (ISDN) Lee
CTO,  Internet Associates, LLC
SME on IP Address Management & IP Address Management Tools and Solutions for two or three IPv6 Organizations

Background - I started pre-Ethernet with modems, Pascal, ADA, Modula II, ISDN, PDP 7, 8's and 11's, Ethernet, TCP/IP, ATM, Frame, VoATM (video and voice), VTC,. Optical switching, MPLS, T1, T3s, SONET/SDH, VoIP,  etc...

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this e-mail are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of any commercial or Government organization or agency.

Martin Hannigan wrote:
On Jan 4, 2008 2:37 AM, John L Lee <johnllee@mindspring.com> wrote:
  
 Marty,

 Its (IPal)  main deployment has been with Service Providers and Government
agencies doing v6 deployment since it support multiple vendors DNS and DHCP
servers and has XML integration  with OSS and NMS systems. As a previous
user of VitalQIP they were re-archit5ecting it to support Web based services
and v6 but in the US they did an agreement with Infoblox to be the front /
backend interface with Qip being the central database.

 John (ISDN) Lee
    


John, I literally utilized each link on IA's website and did not see
any of that functionality. Regardless, my personal opinion is that
it's more suited for the enterprise. There are many tools that call
themselves carrier class or OSS capable, but many fall short. In my
mind, QIP is a proven app who's only downside is the cost.

I don't see the IP tool that you are talking about competing apples
for apples or even peer to peer with QIP, to be honest. They are two
different classes of application.

Last question. Are you affiliated with the company that develops and
sells the software that you are recommending? I found someone named
John L. Lee referenced as "SVP Business Development". If not, I
apologize in advance. If you are, I would appreciate a tad bit more
candor in our discussions here.


Best Regards,

-M<