in fact we (Tiscali) have three customers in Europe that have their own /32 and are running v6 in parallel to v4, and we do transit for them. I do not like that 'full table everywhere' thing at all which is stil way too common in Europe, it does not help pushing v6.

Ok next question - does your IPV6 product have a business case attached to it? how many customers will you have next year? Neil.

Hi Marcel, I tried 12.2(?)T last year and had problems, I put that down to problems in the 12.2T IOS tho not specific to v6. I'm currently running 12.2S on ao couple routers, ipv6 is not enabled yet but the IOS's have behaved well so far... the next step is to check it with ipv6 on Steve On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Marcel Lemmen wrote:

Well, now we are talking about IPv6, I can ask a question right here ;)

Does anyone have any experiences with the Cisco IPv6 IOS (T or S releases)? Can be either good or bad experiences. I heard there were some issues (router freezes etc) with the T releases...

Have to convince the management :)

With kind regards,

Marcel Lemmen Support Net - Partner in Managed Internet Solutions

--= Try http://alt.binaries.nl =--

--- The previous message was something like this: ---

!>Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 13:12:38 +0200 !>From: Alexander Koch <koch@tiscali.net> !>To: Neil J. McRae <neil@DOMINO.ORG> !>Cc: "Nipper, Arnold" <arnold@nipper.de>, !> Peter Galbavy <peter.galbavy@knowtion.net>, Roy <garlic@garlic.com>, !> nanog@merit.edu !>Subject: Re: North America not interested in IP V6 !> !> !>Neil, all, !> !>On Wed, 30 July 2003 11:58:34 +0100, Neil J. McRae wrote: !>> > Here at DE-CIX (www.de-cix.net) I can see that more and more ISP are joining !>> > the IPv6 trial (http://www.de-cix.net/info/decix-ipv6/) . Currently already !>> > 20% of all ~120 ISP at DE-CIX have IPv6 enabled. !>> !>> I'd be more interested in seeing how many customer connections !>> are using IPV6. !> !>in fact we (Tiscali) have three customers in Europe that !>have their own /32 and are running v6 in parallel to v4, and !>we do transit for them. I do not like that 'full table !>everywhere' thing at all which is stil way too common in !>Europe, it does not help pushing v6. !> !>Regards, !>Alexander !> !>(AS-TISCALI-V6PEERS for whom it may concern) !>

On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 10:21:03AM -0700, Jeremy T. Bouse wrote:

At work we implimented 12.2(T) on our IPv6 routers and there were some problems, can't recall specifics now, that meant we did do several IOS upgrades to try and fix. Now we have just finished upgrading to 12.3 on all our routers network-wide and only have the IPv6 functions turned on for those routers we have IPv6 traffic going through...

...

Well, now we are talking about IPv6, I can ask a question right here ;)

Does anyone have any experiences with the Cisco IPv6 IOS (T or S releases)? Can be either good or bad experiences. I heard there were some issues (router freezes etc) with the T releases...

Have to convince the management :)

I've had very good luck with 12.2(14)S3 on the 7200 devices. I can't currently recommend any software for the 7500 if you have a CT3 interface in your router (as most of the ones I manage do) that supports IPv6. The next Cisco release of 12.2S (it will likely be called 12.2(18)S should have all the important IPv6 features that would be necessary for a larger scale deployment (eg: OSPFv3) of IPv6 services. If you're a customer of AS2914 and interested in IPv6, you should send us a note ipv6@eng.verio.net, and we can get things configured fairly quickly. I am seeing at peak 1Mb+ on some of our IPv6 locations (mostly outside the US) but the trend does appear to be upwards. I know that other providers (Sprint, Hurricane Electric [i keep getting those yellow postcards at home], to name a few) have IPv6 services currently available to customers. It seems fairly easy to get a /48 allocation, so if you think you might go IPv6 in the next few years, it's worthwhile to set up a spare 26xx/36xx at least to tunnel the traffic with. (I have also had good results with 12.3(1a) releases). - Jared -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared@puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine.

On Wed, Jul 30, 2003 at 12:30:25 -0400, Marshall Eubanks wrote:

...

I'd be more interested in seeing how many customer connections are using IPV6.

This question came up in discussions at IETF-57, without a good answer.

I count 728 /48 entries in the RIPE database. These should correspond to "sites" or customers (a couple of /48s are allocated to IXs).

As some of you may know, I keep track of various metrics concerning multicast (displayed at http://www.multicasttech.com/status ). Does anyone do anything similar for IPv6 ? The only thing I am aware of is in the I2 netflows, http://netflow.internet2.edu/weekly/ , which lately shows < a tenth of a % of Abilene traffic as IPv6. Is there any more systematic IPv6 measurement work ?

I have been plotting the IPv6 ASNs for some time. These should be the ISPs running IPv6. See: http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ipv6/measurements/index.html rvdp

On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 15:04:25 +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:

The bad news here, or actually good news, is that many ISP's don't register their client /48's. ... Many other tunnelbrokers exist, check for example freenet6, ipv6.he.net and xs26, who apparently have loads of delegations, these are not to be found in the registries either.

Next to that many people still use 6bone space...

Right. And I only counted 2001:600::/23 :-( The other RIPE space has: 2001:600::/23 728 2001:800::/23 213 2001:a00::/23 67 2001:1400::/23 30 2001:1600::/23 0 So a remark like "... no one in Europe is interested either." is nonsense. rvdp