Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:42:57 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said: > infrastructure. Anecdotally: I have yet to work regularly at a facility > that has IPv6 connectivity to the outside world from the WiFi networks > that serve employee laptops. Anecdotally, it's been about a decade since I worked someplac

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

2 mbit is still more than 32 bit ;) alan

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

There has been tomes on this topic. There will continue to be many more. That is because many of you continue in trying to defend the following concept. customer subnet bits == isp customers bits So now, the ISP is supposed to put some effort and gain more bits. Why not the customer? Its

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On 9/Jul/15 18:53, Matthew Huff wrote: > > If an ISP wants to give out a /48, great for them. If they want to give out > only a /56, I say that's fine. What's more important to me is that they > implement IPv6. Arguing about prefix size and SLAAC vs DHCP rather than just > go ahead and impleme

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On 9/Jul/15 21:38, Tyler Applebaum wrote: > Do people actually use VLANs for security? It's nice to implement them for > organizational purposes and to prevent broadcast propagation. Limitation of broadcast propagation could be viewed as a security feature. Mark.

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On 9/Jul/15 21:55, Jared Mauch wrote: > > I run my home as a big broadcast domain, but there's no reason > I wouldn't perhaps segment things differently. There are a lot of people > who just "extend their wifi" by plugging in a 2nd router with a long cable > and don't realize they now have

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On 9/Jul/15 21:45, Matthew Huff wrote: > I've seen VLAN/subnet security used frequently in the financial world, even > to the point of having full firewalls between vlans/subnets. Mostly for > regulator purposes (Chinese firewall and all that). It's also common to allow > outbound requests or

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> And I’m saying you’re ignoring an important part of reality. > > Whatever ISPs default to deploying now will become the standard to which > application developers develop. > > Changing the ISP later is easy. I'm not even convinced of that. Once "/56" (or *any* value) is baked into the proces

ISP DHCPv6 and /48

Hello, Let me introduce another first world problem. We use DHCPv4 to assign each user a IPv4 /32 and DHCPv6-PD to assign a IPv6 /128 WAN plus a /48 prefix. All good. However we are an ISP where the customer chooses his own CPE. We just ship a modem/mediaconverter/ONU with one ethernet port. The

Re: ISP DHCPv6 and /48

In message , Baldur Norddahl writes: > Hello, > > Let me introduce another first world problem. We use DHCPv4 to assign each > user a IPv4 /32 and DHCPv6-PD to assign a IPv6 /128 WAN plus a /48 prefix. > All good. > > However we are an ISP where the customer chooses his own CPE. We just ship >

Re: Also Facebook (was: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion)

On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:01 AM, Nicholas Suan mailto:ns...@nonexiste.net>> wrote: You should elaborate on some of these 'holes' then. Indeed. If there are “holes” in the methodology, then they are quite consistent holes, since Google, APNIC, and Akamai

Re: ISP DHCPv6 and /48

On 10 July 2015 at 12:09, Mark Andrews wrote: > > Who is forbidding you? Not the IETF. Not the RIRs. > RIPE policy requires me to send in justification for review for any allocations larger than a /48. For a $35/month contract? Forget it, not going to happen. Plus it would be rejected. Just h

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On 10/Jul/15 01:08, Owen DeLong wrote: > If we deliver /48s, then they will come up with innovative ways to > make use of those deployments. If we deliver /56s, then innovation > will be constrained to what can be delivered to /56s, even for sites > that have /48s. I'm finding it difficult to wr

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > > On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:33:25 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said: > >> One of the hopeful outcomes of IPv6 adoption was that an ISP could get >> enough to last "forever" in a single transaction. But "forever" isn't >> very long at one /4

Level3 routing issue US west coast

Hi, does anyone else experience issues with the Level3 network at the US west coast? We see lots of broken paths like this: Packets Pings Host Loss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

32 bit connection with a 32 bit address will open up an three-dimensional portal under the hotel. They all know this and work around it by selecting a lower connection speed. On July 10, 2015, at 3:59 AM, Alan Buxey wrote: 2 mbit is still more than 32 bit ;) alan

Re: ISP DHCPv6 and /48

On Jul 10, 2015, at 6:34 AM, Baldur Norddahl wrote: > > RIPE policy requires me to send in justification for review for any > allocations larger than a /48. For a $35/month contract? Forget it, not > going to happen. Plus it would be rejected > …. > It is just sad this is not compatible with the

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On Fri, 2015-07-10 at 02:08 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: > And planning for a future that doesn't happen because you're too caught up > in *planning* that future is irrelevant, too. Advocating for fewer limits is not "planning". It's the opposite of it. It's about retaining more flexibility - as a m

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 12:05:50PM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > In message <011d01d0bab1$e7890a00$b69b1e00$@gmail.com>, "Chuck Church" writes: > > -Original Message- > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jared Mauch > > Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 9:08 AM > > To

Re: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Level3 had an issue with one of their core routers in Los Angeles last night(7pm Pacific) and early this morning(1am Pacific). Last update to my trouble ticket had the issue still being reviewed by engineering, but that a core router was dropping packets. > On Jul 10, 2015, at 3:59 AM, Jürgen J

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Hi Joseph, in the meantime I have ~20 verified paths which are affected and Level3 is simply not competent enough to reroute/drop the affected path ... FYI: my private ticket # is 9446435 ### There is also a new global ticket available: Network Event Detail Network Event Summary: Multiple de

Re: Test-drive the OS X El Capitan public beta

On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:17 AM, Colin Johnston mailto:col...@mx5.org.uk>> wrote: lots of 6GB downloads this morning :) Colin Begin forwarded message: From: Apple Beta Software Program mailto:betaprog...@insideapple.apple.com>> Subject: Test-drive the OS X El Capitan public beta Date: 10 July 20

Re: ISP DHCPv6 and /48

On 7/10/15, 6:34 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Baldur Norddahl" wrote: >Perhaps the problem is that DHCPv6-PD is not intelligent enough. Yes there >is a provision such that the user CPE could give a hint of how much space >is want, but no, it doesn't work. WG] Sorry, [citation needed]. We are using DH

Re: Test-drive the OS X El Capitan public beta

as well hopefully less upgrade traffic once installed as update install images less big as well colin Sent from my iPhone > On 10 Jul 2015, at 14:11, John Curran wrote: > >> On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:17 AM, Colin Johnston wrote: >> >> lots of 6GB downloads this morning :) >> >> Colin >> >> >

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

Meanwhile, I'm sitting here on a patio at a cafe on Samos, Greece. And the free wifi gives me native v6 to my tablet and phone without any intervention. Test-ipv6.com tells me that the score is 10/10 and all the google bits just work. So, surely it "just works". I wish we had it this easy in

Re: Level3 routing issue US west coast

On Friday, July 10, 2015, Joseph Jenkins wrote: > Level3 had an issue with one of their core routers in Los Angeles last > night(7pm Pacific) and early this morning(1am Pacific). Last update to my > trouble ticket had the issue still being reviewed by engineering, but that > a core router was dro

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Hi, sitting here and watching the packet loss coming and going :(. It changes every 10-25min. Looks like an massive issue in San Jose - routers out there sometimes have an latency from 5-6 SECONDS ... best regards Jürgen Jaritsch Head of Network & Infrastructure ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Wow Level3 responded to me that they had an issue last night but they simply did nothing ... for at least 10 hours they did nothing to fix the issue: ### Event Case ID: 9446216 Location: Los Angeles, CA Impacted For: 10 hours 52 minutes ETR: Unknown Bridge: N/A 08:52 GMT - Event Conc

RE: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

I would say it depends on the complexity and probability of it happening accidentally. An incorrect letter (language change perhaps) in a URL that crashes a web server might not be malicious. A crafted ESP or ISAKMP packet that was created in a Linux packet tool and 'randomly' hits your VPN I'd s

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mel Beckman wrote: > I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is "allowed for > in the future" but not configured in the short term. With less than 10,000 > ephemeral users, we don't expect users to demand IPv6 until most mobile > devices and

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 9, 2015, at 23:08 , Ricky Beam wrote: > > On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 21:15:57 -0400, Karl Auer wrote: >> Actually I was mentioning thousands. > > Dozens, millions, whatever. Pick something and get on with it already. I don’t know anyone that’s going to get upset with you if you deploy /48s

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 9, 2015, at 23:33 , Matthew Kaufman wrote: > > On 7/9/2015 3:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >> Can you offer one valid reason not to give residential users /48s? Any >> benefit whatsoever? >> > > Sure. To avoid having to go back and deal with ARIN yet again for more IPv6 > space. >

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 10, 2015, at 00:59 , Joe Maimon wrote: > > There has been tomes on this topic. There will continue to be many more. > > That is because many of you continue in trying to defend the following > concept. > > customer subnet bits == isp customers bits > > So now, the ISP is supposed

Re: ISP DHCPv6 and /48

My solution would be to tell them if they want more than 1 IPv4 /32, they need a router. Then route a prefix of appropriate size to their router. /48 for IPv6 as you are doing, and /n for IPv4. They want 2 addresses, give them a /30. 3-6, /29; 7-14, /28, etc. Seems pretty straight forward to me

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Hi, >Wow Level3 responded to me that they had an issue last night but >they simply did nothing ... for at least 10 hours they >did nothing to fix the >issue: Any SLA broken? Probably not, that would be a reason to move. Kind regards, Jens

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Hi, No SLA broken cause A- and B-End were not directly our circuits ... but it helps a lot to place some new orders ... at other partners :). best regards Jürgen Jaritsch -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] Im Auftrag von Jens Hoffmann Gesendet: Frei

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 10, 2015, at 03:57 , Matthew Kaufman wrote: > > > >> On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >> >> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:33:25 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said: >> >>> One of the hopeful outcomes of IPv6 adoption was that an ISP could get >>> enough to last "forever"

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 10, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > >>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 03:57 , Matthew Kaufman wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:33:25 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said: >>> One of the hopeful outcomes

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

This is a side issue, but I'm surprised ARIN is still advertising incorrect information in the table. A small ISP client of mine had just received their first /23 earlier this year, and I convinced them they should deploy IPv6 along with IPv4 in their new PoP. It would cost nothing, I argued, as

Weekly Routing Table Report

This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan. The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, AusNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, CaribNOG and the RIPE Routing Working Group. Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@lists.apnic.net For hi

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

On 09-07-15 23:51, Nick Hilliard wrote: On 09/07/2015 22:35, Ricky Beam wrote: "Free" if you have a support contract. No, free-as-in-beer. You register a guest CCO account, email t...@cisco.com, provide the device serial number (or output of "show hardware") and the bugid + Cisco PSIRT URL ref

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On Jul 10, 2015, at 1:35 PM, Mel Beckman mailto:m...@beckman.org>> wrote: This is a side issue, but I'm surprised ARIN is still advertising incorrect information in the table. ... Are you saying that there is no way to get an IPv6 allocation in the xx-small category? ARIN: Yes. The /36 prefix i

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Paul Hoogsteder wrote: > On 09-07-15 23:51, Nick Hilliard wrote: > >> On 09/07/2015 22:35, Ricky Beam wrote: >> >>> "Free" if you have a support contract. >>> >> No, free-as-in-beer. >> >> You register a guest CCO account, email t...@cisco.com, provide the device

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

John, Thanks for the clarification. I'm happy to abide by the original community decision, but I think it's important that the table be clarified, especially given that the ARIN specialist I worked with agreed that it needs clarification. It's like going to a Starbucks as a homeless person wi

Joker.com contact / GLUE help

Hi NANOG, Does anyone have any technical contacts at Joker.com? I am going in circles with their support folks trying to update the GLUE records for two of my nameservers and keep running into permissions issues despite the glue records clearly being part of my domain. I need to speak to someone

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On Jul 10, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Mel Beckman mailto:m...@beckman.org>> wrote: John, Thanks for the clarification. I'm happy to abide by the original community decision, but I think it's important that the table be clarified, especially given that the ARIN specialist I worked with agreed that it ne

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

In message , Christopher Morrow writes: > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mel Beckman wrote: > > I working on a large airport WiFi deployment right now. IPv6 is "allowed = > for in the future" but not configured in the short term. With less than 10,= > 000 ephemeral users, we don't expect users

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Limited municipal budgets is all I can say. IPv6 has a cost, and if they can put it off till later then that's often good politics. -mel via cell > On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:42 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > In message > > , Christopher Morrow writes: >>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mel Be

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 07:41:53AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > +1 and you will most probably see about 50% of the traffic being IPv6 if > you do so. There is lots of IPv6 capable equipment out there just waiting > to see a RA. What I noticed when I ran a transparent HTTP proxy at my gate

The Cidr Report

This report has been generated at Fri Jul 10 21:14:43 2015 AEST. The report analyses the BGP Routing Table of AS2.0 router and generates a report on aggregation potential within the table. Check http://www.cidr-report.org/2.0 for a current version of this report. Recent Table History Date

BGP Update Report

BGP Update Report Interval: 02-Jul-15 -to- 09-Jul-15 (7 days) Observation Point: BGP Peering with AS131072 TOP 20 Unstable Origin AS Rank ASNUpds % Upds/PfxAS-Name 1 - AS9829 220585 5.2% 195.7 -- BSNL-NIB National Internet Backbone,IN 2 - AS23752

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

In message , Mel Beckman writ es: > Limited municipal budgets is all I can say. IPv6 has a cost, and if they > can put it off till later then that's often good politics. > > -mel via cell IPv4 has a cost as well. May as well just go IPv6-only from day one and not pay the IPv4 tax at all. The co

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

There is most certainly a cost to IPv6, especially in a large, complex deployment, where everything requires acceptance testing. And I'm sure you realize that IPv6 only is not an option. I agree that it would have been worth the cost, which would have been just a small fraction of the total. Th

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

The bug that this crash impacts is in ASA was introduced in 9.1(4.3) and fixed in 9.1(5.1) and later. Are you inside the affected version range? If not, it's not the bug being discussed here. If so, you may wish to upgrade. Cheers, Christoph On 10 July 2015 at 12:56, Eddie Tardist wrote: > On Fr

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

Thank you! -mel via cell On Jul 10, 2015, at 2:19 PM, John Curran mailto:jcur...@arin.net>> wrote: On Jul 10, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Mel Beckman mailto:m...@beckman.org>> wrote: John, Thanks for the clarification. I'm happy to abide by the original community decision, but I think it's important

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

In message <20150710215658.gc23...@puck.nether.net>, Jared Mauch writes: > On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 07:41:53AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > +1 and you will most probably see about 50% of the traffic being IPv6 if > > you do so. There is lots of IPv6 capable equipment out there just waiting > > t

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

> Limited municipal budgets is all I can say. > IPv6 has a cost, and if they can put it off > till later then that's often good politics. IPv4 has a cost as well. May as well just go IPv6-only from day one and not pay the IPv4 tax at all. The cost difference between providing IPv6 + IPv4 o

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

1.1.1.1 is usually a good bet On Jul 10, 2015 6:21 PM, "Mark Andrews" wrote: > > In message <20150710215658.gc23...@puck.nether.net>, Jared Mauch writes: > > On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 07:41:53AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > +1 and you will most probably see about 50% of the traffic being IPv6 >

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

In message , Mel Beckman writ es: > There is most certainly a cost to IPv6, especially in a large, complex > deployment, where everything requires acceptance testing. And I'm sure > you realize that IPv6 only is not an option. I agree that it would have > been worth the cost, which would have bee

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 10:08:15PM +, Mel Beckman wrote: > There is most certainly a cost to IPv6, especially in a large, complex > deployment, where everything requires acceptance testing. And I'm sure you > realize that IPv6 only is not an option. I agree that it would have been > worth t

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Christoph Blecker wrote: > The bug that this crash impacts is in ASA was introduced in 9.1(4.3) > and fixed in 9.1(5.1) and later. Are you inside the affected version > range? If not, it's not the bug being discussed here. If so, you may > wish to upgrade. > Whic

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

You perhaps haven't worked a large government network deployment before. One doesn't activate features not enumerated in the design. Ever. Because they won't get and can thus introduce security or reliability covered in acceptance testing and could introduce security or reliability problems. The

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:48:46PM +, Mel Beckman wrote: > You perhaps haven't worked a large government network deployment before. One > doesn't activate features not enumerated in the design. Ever. Because they > won't get and can thus introduce security or reliability covered in > accepta

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Mark, Few acceptance test regimes cover established feature testing. It's just too expensive. For example, an acceptance test of a firewall installation does not include validating the DPI implementation. Government and enterprise buyers rely on certifications, such as ICSA for firewalls, IPv6R

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 16:06:03 -0400, Mel Beckman wrote: It's like going to a Starbucks as a homeless person with just pocket change, and ordering the cheapest coffee on the menu, and being told "Oh, that's for off-planet visitors only. It says so on our website under "Terms and Conditions."

Re: Possible Sudden Uptick in ASA DOS?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 7/10/2015 4:00 PM, Eddie Tardist wrote: > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Christoph Blecker > wrote: > >> The bug that this crash impacts is in ASA was introduced in >> 9.1(4.3) and fixed in 9.1(5.1) and later. Are you inside the >> affecte

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Jared, http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/525db76369bedd1029d61f47-1200/august-2009.jpg Perfect! -mel via cell On Jul 10, 2015, at 5:02 PM, Jared Mauch mailto:ja...@puck.nether.net>> wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:48:46PM +, Mel Beckman wrote: You perhaps haven't worked a large g

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

Ricky, I am always in favor of redundant clarity over technically correct confusion :) -mel beckman > On Jul 10, 2015, at 5:08 PM, Ricky Beam wrote: > >> On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 16:06:03 -0400, Mel Beckman wrote: >> It's like going to a Starbucks as a homeless person with just pocket change,

AW: Level3 routing issue US west coast

Level3 is broken again ... Packets Pings HostLoss% Snt Last Avg Best Wrst StDev 1. 178.255.154.17 63.6%120.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 2. ge

Re: Also Facebook (was: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion)

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 06:14:16 -0400, John Curran wrote: If there are “holes” in the methodology, then they are quite consistent holes... They are mere statistics. They say only what they say without any measured margin of error. For Google, their numbers are collected via javascript embedd

Re: Level3 routing issue US west coast

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Jürgen Jaritsch wrote: > Level3 is broken again ... > maybe today they decided to only do L2 routing? :)

Re: Also Facebook (was: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion)

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 08:58:22PM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: > On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 06:14:16 -0400, John Curran wrote: > >If there are “holes” in the methodology, then they are quite consistent > >holes... > > They are mere statistics. They say only what they say without any measured > margin of er

Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion

> On Jul 10, 2015, at 12:50 , John Curran wrote: > > On Jul 10, 2015, at 1:35 PM, Mel Beckman > mailto:m...@beckman.org>> wrote: > > This is a side issue, but I'm surprised ARIN is still advertising incorrect > information in the table. > ... > Are you saying that there is no way to get an IP

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

How can it be a large, complex deployment if it’s greenfield. In that case, you need to acceptance test the IPv4 just as much as IPv6. The difference is that you don’t have to rerun your acceptance tests 6-months later when you have to implement IPv6 in a rush because you suddenly learned that

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Owen, I never said it was a greenfield deployment. Someone else tagged it with that term. My understanding of the term "greenfield" WRT wifi is that there are no interfering signals to contend with. I don't know of any U.S. airport that meets that definition. First you have all the wifi of co

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

On 11/07/15 08:25, Shane Ronan wrote: 1.1.1.1 is usually a good bet Sadly yes, even though it's valid public IP space Cisco still have it documented as their suggested captive portal address. Despite it (and 1.2.3.0/24) being advertised by $ORK for years at this point on behalf of APNIC.

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

> On Jul 10, 2015, at 22:34 , Mel Beckman wrote: > > Owen, > > I never said it was a greenfield deployment. Someone else tagged it with that > term. > > My understanding of the term "greenfield" WRT wifi is that there are no > interfering signals to contend with. I don't know of any U.S. ai

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Yes, but TBH, they are advertised as a darkspace collection project, so Cisco’s use is actually somewhat helpful to that activity. It’s unlikely that 1.1.1.0/24 or 1.2.3.0/24 will ever be allocated by APNIC. Owen > On Jul 10, 2015, at 22:47 , Julien Goodwin wrote: > > On 11/07/15 08:25, Shane

Re: Hotels/Airports with IPv6

Owen, Lol. No, I'm a Mac guy. We think different :) I suppose when an airport is first built, that would be greenfield. But this airport already has a legacy wifi system that we are replacing, incrementally. I agree that a case exists for building in IPv6 from the start, but this deployment a