IPv6 daydreams

Mon Oct 17 10:22:10 UTC 2005

Mohacsi Janos wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Peter Dambier wrote:
> 
>>
>> From an end-user:
>>
>> I dont know what I should need an /64 for but it's barf, barf anyhow.
>>
>> My routing table is telling me I have got a /124 only:
>>
>> The tunnel (network) *::0
>> The end of the tunnel *::1
>> Me *::2
>> The tunnel broadcast *::3
> 
> 
> What? Broadcast?

Well, it is singlecast :)

ping *::3 and 1 answers.

ping *::1 ok 1 answers.

ping *::2 nobody answers - that is my configuration problem.

ping *::0 nobody answers

> 
>>
>> Right now I have the impression we are only enusers.
>> Right now I have the impression we are all connected to the same
>> university PC running BSD something.
>>
>> Ok, today I have some NATted stuff that would be fond of its own
>> ip. Kicking my NAT-box out I could grow my hair again. No more
>> worring who needs what port and why.
>>
>> Beware!
>>
>> Who is printing all those bank listings on my new printer. It
>> was a wholesale networkprinter. Just plug it into the power
>> and print. Must have been stolen from the bank of china because
>> it is all chines companies.
>>
>> And why is that van with the ice cream waiting in front of my
>> neighour? It is me who ordered the icream. They have thrown
>> out their freecer. I dont know why. It was working perfectly.
>> I had no problems connecting it to my wlan and ordering. They
>> did not even care about my bank account beeing empty. They told
>> me I had enough credit to by their company.
>>
>> Sorry I have to stop now. Some policemen want to talk with me
>> about a major fraud done with my IPv6 tunnel.
>>
>> See you later :)
> 
> 
> 
> Janos Mohacsi
> Network Engineer, Research Associate
> NIIF/HUNGARNET, HUNGARY
> Key 00F9AF98: 8645 1312 D249 471B DBAE  21A2 9F52 0D1F 00F9 AF98
> 
>>
>>
>> Jeroen Massar wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 02:52 +0000, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 15 Oct 2005, Tony Li wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hopefully, that will reach a point where the operators show up and
>>>>> participate at IETF, rather than the IETF coming to NANOG.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> agreed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Full ack. Ops should really realize that they can have a lot of
>>> influence in the processes and what is actually being standardized.
>>> Which really helps the ops a lot as they then have an extra foot in
>>> the door at the Vendors, as the IETF is also known as the IVTF as some
>>> people like to call it :)
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 09:15 +0530, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 17/10/05, David Barak <thegameiam at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd change the allocation approach: rather than give
>>>>> every customer a /64, which represents an IPv4
>>>>> universe full of IPv4 universes, I'd think that any
>>>>> customer can make do with a single IPv4-size universe,
>>>>> and make the default end-customer allocation a /96.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I personally am in favor of reducing minimum allocations like this -
>>>> and as was discussed quite extensively in the "botnet of toasters and
>>>> microwave ovens when you ipv6 enable the lot" thread a few weeks back,
>>>> it usually ends up that there's just one host in a /48 or /64 so that
>>>> the sparsely populated v6 address space means bots cant go scanning IP
>>>> space for vulnerable hosts like they do in v4
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is a current document out for trying to get this stepped back to
>>> a /56 for _enduser_ sites. Corporate / Organisational / Business sites
>>> should then still get a /48.
>>>
>>> HD ratio docs:
>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-1.html
>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-08.html
>>>
>>> Endsite definition:
>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-4.html
>>>
>>> As a note, out of my IPv6 /48, at home, I only use one /64 as I bridged
>>> the wireless and wired networks. This was easier than having Samba do
>>> remote announces to the other /64 and also allows me to re-attach my
>>> laptop and plug it into the wired without it changing the IP, very cheap
>>> 'mobility' :) A /56 for 'home usage', thus having 2^8 = 256 /64's or
>>> subnets would IMHO (force me to drink beer when this ever turns out to
>>> be wrong :) be enough for most home usages. I really don't see people
>>> installing 200+ routed networks in a home. Most people don't even have
>>> more than 4 rooms and one /64 already contains 2^64 addresses, unless we
>>> go for the IP-per-carpet-fiber approach, just give the carpet in your
>>> house a single /64 and you still have 255 subnets to go...
>>>
>>>
>>>> It also means that when Vint Cerf's research about extending the
>>>> internet into outer space comes through (or when we finally start
>>>> exchanging email, http or whatever traffic with aliens), there's
>>>> sooner or later going to be an intergalactic assembly of some sort
>>>> where delegations from Betelgeuse and Magrathea will complain about
>>>> how those @^$^$#^$^ earthlings hogged all the v6 space thinking
>>>> there's more than enough v6 IP space to allot a /48 to every single
>>>> molecule on earth, so now they're not getting enough IP space to
>>>> network a group of computers that'll plot the answer to life, the
>>>> universe and everything.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> They don't need to, this computer is already there, it is Earth.....
>>> there just ain't no plotter installed and we will be destroyed for that
>>> superhighway and then re-built as Earth 2, but we won't notice that :)
>>>
>>>
>>>> Well, I know that sounds silly, but people were handing out class A, B
>>>> and C space for years thinking nobody at all would run out of v4
>>>> space, there's lots of it so why not just parcel it out with open
>>>> hands.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The Huitema-Durand / Host-Density (HD) ratio RFC3194 it explains quite a
>>> number of these issues and covers most of them.
>>>
>>> Next to that note that 2000::/3 is only 1/8th of the total IPv6 address
>>> space. If we peep up, we can do that 8 times before the address space is
>>> full and I am quite sure if 2000::/3 runs out that people will start
>>> having some really loud discussions. Indeed 2000::/3 would then be
>>> similar to 'class A' space...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Back to operations - there was this interesting proposal - well, two
>>>> proposals as it turned out - at apnic 20 -
>>>> http://www.apnic.net/meetings/20/report.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Similar to the one done above in the RIPE region :)
>>>
>>> Greets,
>>>  Jeroen
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Peter and Karin Dambier
>> Public-Root
>> Graeffstrasse 14
>> D-64646 Heppenheim
>> +49-6252-671788 (Telekom)
>> +49-179-108-3978 (O2 Genion)
>> +49-6252-750308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
>> mail: peter at peter-dambier.de
>> mail: peter at echnaton.serveftp.com
>> http://iason.site.voila.fr
>> http://www.kokoom.com/iason
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Peter and Karin Dambier
Public-Root
Graeffstrasse 14
D-64646 Heppenheim
+49-6252-671788 (Telekom)
+49-179-108-3978 (O2 Genion)
+49-6252-750308 (VoIP: sipgate.de)
mail: peter at peter-dambier.de
mail: peter at echnaton.serveftp.com
http://iason.site.voila.fr
http://www.kokoom.com/iason