Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 27, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Måns Nilsson wrote: > I am -- in addition to running eBGP for my employer -- also the acting > network strategist and proper IP networking evangelist at my employer. Thereby demonstrating how far out of the mainstream your enterprise is, given that those roles gen

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

>> I disagree, i simply see an additional fee for IPv4 coming about. > And that in itself seems like it would make IPv6-reachable things a > lot more compelling. could be. but ... i am a consumer end user. i wish to keep my bill down. unless there is a means for the user to exercise a meaningf

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

>> when the average consumer (real) broadband connection becomes v6 >> capable, about 40% of the traffic is instantly ipv6, thank you >> netflix, facebook, netflix, google, netflix, and netflix. > 'When', or 'if'? The creeping proliferation of CGNs and the like, > along with your example of TVs a

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 27, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > sorry if the facts did not support your conclusion. they do support mine. Pointers to these facts would be greatly appreciated, especially as no one else seems to know where to find them. ;> > big initial ipv6 traffic bump This is what I que

Spanner: synchronizing the largest global database with GPSDO stratum 1 in every datacenter

(GPSDO for local data center as stratum 1) http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/11/google-spanner-time/all/ Exclusive: Inside Google Spanner, the Largest Single Database on Earth By Cade Metz 11.26.12 6:30 AM Each morning, when Andrew Fikes sat down at his desk inside Google headquarters i

CfP: Survey on network attack detection and mitigation

Dear NANOG, I'd like to draw your attention to a survey we're conducting in context of several research projects: +--- Call for Participation ---+ | Survey on network attack detection and mitigation | +

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

>> sorry if the facts did not support your conclusion. they do support >> mine. > Pointers to these facts would be greatly appreciated, especially as no > one else seems to know where to find them. to repeat, a very large broadband provider has said semi-publicly, and another has corroborated, wh

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:50 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > the cause is netflix and youtube, with a bit of help from fb and non-youtube > gobble. Just because their users can reach popular content-rich/high-bandwidth endpoint sites via IPv6 *that they can also reach via IPv4* doesn't seem to provide m

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

You can look back on Nanog56 and watch Liviu's presentation regarding implementation in the RCS-RDS network. Why, you ask? Because they/we can do it. IPv4 exhaustion is upon us. CGN will break some of the fuctionality of current day networks or rather APPs running on those networks. Because y

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

Thus spake Dobbins, Roland (rdobb...@arbor.net) on Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:16:27PM +: > > On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:50 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > > > the cause is netflix and youtube, with a bit of help from fb and > > non-youtube gobble. > > Just because their users can reach popular content-r

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > In message , Mikael > Abrah > amsson writes: >> On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Michael Thomas wrote: >> >> > I don't see either Apple or Microsoft as being the hindrance. In fact, >> > both of them seem pretty ready, fsvo "ready". Unlike ISP's by and

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Dobbins, Roland wrote: Obviously, they deployed IPv6 for other reasons, and it would be far more useful to know *why* they deployed it in the first place (i.e., as an experiment, because their user base is outstripping their IPv4 allocations, etc.). IPv6 deployment is no

Folks - changes to USTiming.ORG NIST Time Servers access names...

So I wanted to bring up we are making some changes in the NIST Server addresses and creating two pools they are: east-pool.ustiming.org west-pool.ustiming.org Also there is a new VLAN which can provide you your own /24 of access space for the NIST infrastructure anywhere in th

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 11/27/2012 11:19 AM, Dale W. Carder wrote: > Thus spake Dobbins, Roland (rdobb...@arbor.net) on Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at > 03:16:27PM +: >> >> On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:50 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >> >>> the cause is netflix and youtube, with a bit of help from fb and >>> non-youtube gobble. >> >>

Looking for an Optimum Online engineer

We have been fighting with an issue with a customer who is having issues on a business Cable Line in Wyoming, is there someone out there who might be able to help up troubleshoot a little? We have been through normal routes, but because it is not a consistent issue, we cant actually see what i

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 11/26/12 9:32 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most programmers totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing is being done. This is a point that is probably more significant than is appreciated. If the app, IT, and net

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 11/26/12 8:59 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Michael Thomas wrote: I don't see either Apple or Microsoft as being the hindrance. In fact, both of them seem pretty ready, fsvo "ready". Unlike ISP's by and large. But I'm pretty sure that both iPhones and Androids are pretty

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, mike wrote: > On 11/26/12 8:59 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> >> On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Michael Thomas wrote: >> >>> I don't see either Apple or Microsoft as being the hindrance. In fact, >>> both of them seem pretty ready, fsvo "ready". Unlike ISP's by and large.

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 11/27/2012 11:58 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, mike wrote: Is this the app's fault? What are they doing wrong? Yes, it is the app's fault. They are either doing IPv4 literals or IPv4-only sockets The IPv4 literal issues is when they do "wget http://192.168

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

In message , Mikael Abrahamsson writes: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > > Obviously, they deployed IPv6 for other reasons, and it would be far > > more useful to know *why* they deployed it in the first place (i.e., as > > an experiment, because their user base is outstrippin

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

In message <50b512b6.1010...@mtcc.com>, mike writes: > On 11/26/12 9:32 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > > > The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most programme > rs totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing is being done. > > > This is a point that is prob

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 11/27/2012 12:41 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: In message <50b512b6.1010...@mtcc.com>, mike writes: On 11/26/12 9:32 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most programme rs totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing is being done

"Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 2012-11-27 20:21, mike wrote: > On 11/26/12 9:32 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: >> >> The main problem with IPv6 only is that most app developers (most >> programmers totally) do not really have access to this, so no testing >> is being done. >> > This is a point that is probably more significant

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Michael Thomas wrote: > On 11/27/2012 11:58 AM, Cameron Byrne wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:28 AM, mike wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Is this the app's fault? What are they doing wrong? >>> >> >> Yes, it is the app's fault. >> >> They are either doing IPv4 lit

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 2012-11-27, at 21:07, Jeroen Massar wrote: > As such, if an application does not do proper IPv6 today the people in > charge of the thing simply did not care... Or do care. From http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/HadoopIPv6: > Apache Hadoop does not currently support IPv6 networks, it uses IPv4 >

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote: As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse. bull. explain using a tunnel broker to anyone who isn't a network engineer. oh, and then make that work insid

RE: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

> > The better question, for an isp, is what kind of ipv4 secondary market budget do you have? > How hot is your cgn running? Like ALGs much ? Security and attribute much ? > > These are important, yes. > > > Again , users dont care or know about v4 or v6. This is purely a network operator and a

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

Personally I have ran into this dilema a few times. The code just like network equipment needs dual stacks which is double the amount of code and since IPv4 and IPv6 do not share a native topology just supporting both kinds of addresses isnt sufficient. I agree that some of it comes down to knowl

RE: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

> From: Dobbins, Roland [mailto:rdobb...@arbor.net] > On Nov 27, 2012, at 3:37 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > If you don't think that the need to sustain the growth in the number of devices attached to > the network (never mind the number of things causing that rate to accelerate[1]) makes IPv6 > in

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

In message <84f8debc-c754-4d06-99b0-405cc8a35...@josephholsten.com>, Joseph Hol sten writes: > On 2012-11-27, at 21:07, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > As such, if an application does not do proper IPv6 today the people in > > charge of the thing simply did not care... > > Or do care.=20 > > =46rom htt

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 11/27/2012 01:07 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote: On 2012-11-27 20:21, mike wrote: This is a point that is probably more significant than is appreciated. If the app, IT, and networking ecosystem don't even have access to ipv6 to play around with, you can be guaranteed that they are going to be hesita

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

In message , david rai strick writes: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > > As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways > > to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse. > > bull. explain using a tunnel broker to anyone who isn't a ne

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 27, 2012, at 4:30 PM, Bryan Tong wrote: > Personally I have ran into this dilema a few times. > > The code just like network equipment needs dual stacks which is double > the amount of code and since IPv4 and IPv6 do not share a native > topology just supporting both kinds of addresses i

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote: > I cannot be saf for the people who claim to be programmers who do things > with networking and who do not care to follow the heavy hints that they > have been getting for at least the last 10 years that their applications > need to start supp

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Mark Andrews wrote: oh, and then make that work inside a typical F500 corp network with restrictions on inbound and outbound ports, no admin user access to desktop machines, etc. And if they are developing a product for the company there are procedures to get the changes n

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Nov 27, 2012, at 8:47 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > >> Obviously, they deployed IPv6 for other reasons, and it would be far more >> useful to know *why* they deployed it in the first place (i.e., as an >> experiment, because their user base i

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On 27 Nov 2012, at 14:50, Randy Bush wrote: >>> sorry if the facts did not support your conclusion. they do support >>> mine. >> Pointers to these facts would be greatly appreciated, especially as no >> one else seems to know where to find them. > > to repeat, a very large broadband provider h

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

In message , William Herrin writes: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > I cannot be saf for the people who claim to be programmers who do things > > with networking and who do not care to follow the heavy hints that they > > have been getting for at least the last 10 year

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 27, 2012, at 1:26 PM, david raistrick wrote: > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >> As for actually getting IPv6 at home or at work, there are so many ways >> to get that, thus not having it is a completely ridiculous excuse. > > bull. explain using a tunnel broker to anyone

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

> >> I agree that some of it comes down to knowledge; most programmers >> learn from experience and lets face it unless you go looking your >> unlikely to run into IPv6 even as of yet. I believe as the ISP >> implements IPv6 and companies get more demand on the customer facing >> side of things it

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 27 Nov 2012, at 23:44, Owen DeLong wrote: > Given the number of network engineers compared to the number of tunnel broker > subscribers just at Hurricane Electric, I don't think that argument holds > water. > > We have actually made using a tunnel broker very easy and provide pretty > com

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 11/27/2012 03:44 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: I would think that a developer of corporate network-based applications that is worth his salt would be one of the people pushing the IT/Neteng group to give him the tools to do his job. If he waits until they are implementing IPv6 on corporate deskto

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > I've coded for platforms that I have never worked on. It's a little > more difficult but not impossible. I've debugged problems on > machines that I don't have access to. Again it is more difficult > but not impossible. Sure, but like me y

juniper vpn

Hello, Does anyone know a practical and somewhat user friendly way of connecting to juniper vpn using linux? I have happily used http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/vpnc/ a allow linux users to connect cisco vpn boxes where a crappy cisco vpn client would be needed otherwise, and it works v

Re: juniper vpn

There's a linux nc connect client if you're using ive's...used to be tricky with supplicants, but last time I tried it was pretty user friendly On Nov 27, 2012 6:28 PM, "Jeroen van Aart" wrote: > Hello, > > Does anyone know a practical and somewhat user friendly way of connecting > to juniper vpn

Re: juniper vpn

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:25:46 -0800, Jeroen van Aart wrote: > Hello, > > Does anyone know a practical and somewhat user friendly way of > connecting to juniper vpn using linux? > > I have happily used http://www.unix-ag.uni-kl.de/~massar/vpnc/ a > allow linux users to connect cisco vpn boxes wher

RE: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation. Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes IPv6, they need to accommodate the effects of all the other programmers who aren't writing a line of IPv6 code. CGN renders most application logs useless unless they re

Re: juniper vpn

Do you want one for IPSEC or for the SSL VPN Appliance that Juniper is pushing nowadays? Owen On Nov 27, 2012, at 18:25 , Jeroen van Aart wrote: > Hello, > > Does anyone know a practical and somewhat user friendly way of connecting to > juniper vpn using linux? > > I have happily used http:

Re: juniper vpn

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > Do you want one for IPSEC or for the SSL VPN Appliance that Juniper is > pushing nowadays? > > Owen > > On Nov 27, 2012, at 18:25 , Jeroen van Aart wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Does anyone know a practical and somewhat user friendly way of >

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 27, 2012, at 19:18 , "Dave Edelman" wrote: > I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation. > > Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes IPv6, they need > to accommodate the effects of all the other programmers who aren't writing a > line of IPv6

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > > If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not > be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use. They are > after all just a VPN and millions of road warriers use them everyday. Oh, for crumb's sake. You'

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 28, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > If the entire deployment path automatically requires 84 layers of NAT sludge, > that's what gets tested, cause it "works" for "everybody". Hence my questions regarding the actual momentum behind end-to-end native IPv6 deployment. Inertia

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, mike wrote: You're saying there are no cellular v6 deployments? I'm about 99% certain that you're wrong. I see v6 addresses in my apache logs all the time and they're almost definitely while they're not on wifi (my site uploads gps data while people are skiing, so they're

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

In message <20121128041816.gf1...@dyn.com>, Andrew Sullivan writes: > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > > If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not > > be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use. They are > > after all just a VP

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 11/27/2012 09:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: In message <20121128041816.gf1...@dyn.com>, Andrew Sullivan writes: On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 08:41:13AM +1100, Mark Andrews wrote: If they are writing network based code a tunnel broker should not be a issue. Tunnel brokers are not that hard to use.

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > And using some tunnel brokers are just as easy. ;> --- Roland Dobbins // Luck is

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 09:04:56PM -0800, Michael Thomas wrote: > Let's be clear: nobody sets up a VPN because they want to. And further, only people who think cell phones are newfangled think that "configuring dial-up before ppp was available" is a test we can apply to _anything_ for the quality

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 11/27/2012 09:20 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:00 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > >> And using some tunnel brokers are just as easy. > > > > ;> When I subscribed I never dreamed I would post anything, as I am not a network

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On Nov 28, 2012, at 12:32 PM, Nigel Stepp wrote: > So there's one data point with the promise of others. You are atypical in comparison the the legions of ordinary developers within enterprise organizations, in terms of your skillset, your breadth of perspective, and your ability to effectuate

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

Sent from ipv6-only Android On Nov 27, 2012 8:39 PM, "Mikael Abrahamsson" wrote: > > On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, mike wrote: > >> You're saying there are no cellular v6 deployments? I'm about 99% certain that you're wrong. I see v6 addresses in my apache logs all the time and they're almost definitely wh

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

In message <69adb141-d40b-4dfb-8fbc-d0863897b...@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s: > > On Nov 27, 2012, at 19:18 , "Dave Edelman" wrote: > > > I think that we are missing a significant part of this conversation.=20= > > >=20 > > Even if programmers never write a line of code that invokes IPv6,

Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration

On Tue, 27 Nov 2012, Cameron Byrne wrote: Verizon in the USA does have iOS on ipv6. Afaik, the network must ask for it the same way all Android Samsung devices on t-mobile now have ipv6 as a user option because it is part of the requirements for the oems. I have been trying to locate someone w

Re: "Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

Owen DeLong wrote: > Take a carrier like Comcast that has ~20,000,000 subscribers. That's > 660,000,000,000 or 660 Terabytes per day of log files. Now, imagine > trying to keep that data set for 7 years worth of data. That's a > 660*365*7 = 1,686,300 Terabyte (or 1.7 Exabyte) storage array. On m