Subject: jabber rooms

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 04:05:07 +0100

I don't think I've seen a reminder this week that
jabber room for the XXX WG or BOF is

    [email-masked]

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:38:16 -0800

> jabber room for the XXX WG or BOF is

FYI:

Audio feed info:
http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/

Jabber info:
http://www.xmpp.org/ietf-chat.html

Meeting slides:
https://onsite.ietf.org/public/meeting_materials.cgi?meeting_num=64

Andy

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 09:27:09 -0500

> jabber room for the XXX WG or BOF is

Brian,

I commented to someone last night night that, usually, at this 
point in an IETF week, the list has been treated to a greater or 
lesser degree of whining about network quality and availability. 
We haven't seen any of those messages this week.   I hypothesize 
that there have been few complaints this week for the same 
reason that the absence of jabber room reminders may not have 
been noticed -- I've only occasionally found the network stable 
enough in the meeting sessions to make use of jabber rooms 
effective and useful in following what is going on.

      john

---

From: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 07:33:55 -0800

On Nov 9, 2005, at 6:27, John C Klensin wrote:

> I commented to someone last night night that, usually, at this point 
> in an IETF week, the list has been treated to a greater or lesser 
> degree of whining about network quality and availability. We haven't 
> seen any of those messages this week.   I hypothesize that there have 
> been few complaints this week for the same reason that the absence of 
> jabber room reminders may not have been noticed -- I've only 
> occasionally found the network stable enough in the meeting sessions 
> to make use of jabber rooms effective and useful in following what is 
> going on.
>
>      john
>
>

	the absence of a NOC@ address for reporting problems has been noticed 
as well...
--bill

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 09:29:30 -0800

John,

> reminders may not have been noticed -- I've only occasionally found  
> the network stable enough in the meeting sessions to make use of  
> jabber rooms effective and useful in following what is going on.

I agree.  In the IPv6 w.g. session our jabber scribe couldn't do  
anything useful.

Bob

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 09:47:59 -0800

On Nov 09 2005, at 06:27 Uhr, John C Klensin wrote:

> I've only occasionally found the network stable enough

At the danger of spilling the beans:

Once I switched may laptop to .11a, the network has been rock-solid.
(I ran a ping yesterday, and it did not lose *a single packet* on the  
wireless over a period of hours.)

Gruesse, Carsten

PS.: I bought my .11a card on Ebay for a couple bucks :-)

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 10:06:24 -0800

I was considering myself doing the same, but ... Some people use laptops
with integrated b or b/g cards and not sure if is so easy to find a couple
of bucks card with includes drivers for all the OSs (example Mac OS X).

In any case, my point of view is:
1) We should be advised even BEFORE the meeting registration is open, if the
network will be weak or even worst in the support of any given widespread
technology.

2) The network is a service for the participants, and consequently should be
adapted to them, NEVER the participants adapt to the network ! If for
whatever reason this happens, enough spare cards for the available
technology with support of widespread OSs, should be made available on-site.

Furthermore, the IPv6 availability has not been stable, and IPv6 today is
NOT an experiment, is a real need.

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
> Responder a: <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 09:47:59 -0800
> Para: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
> CC: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>, IETF discussion list <[email-masked]>
> Asunto: Re: jabber rooms
> 

************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Barcelona 2005 Global IPv6 Summit
Information available at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.

---

From: Simon Leinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:08:37 +0100

John C Klensin writes:
> I hypothesize that there have been few complaints this week for the
> same reason that the absence of jabber room reminders may not have
> enough in the meeting sessions to make use of jabber rooms effective
> and useful in following what is going on.

That may only be half of the truth... the others don't complain
because they have 802.11a (5GHz) cards and found that the network has
been working great for them this week.  Of course they won't talk
about that either, because one of the reasons why 802.11a works so
well is that its users are still in the minority.

For me, IPv4 connectivity from the meeting to my "home" network in
Europe has been very good, and IPv6 connectivity even better.

The only problem I had with IPv6 was the usual one: bogus IPv6 Router
Advertisements from laptops configured as 6to4 routers.  Right now
these bogus RAs all seem to be coming from IPv6 link-local address
fe80::204:23ff:fe7a:fb3e (MAC address 00:04:23:7A:FB:3E).  Googling
these addresses shows that the same address was active at IETF62 and
IETF63.  Hm, maybe we should track that one down next time...

Anyway, I finally learned how to configure filters on my Linux laptop,
and found that the following command (as root) makes my box ignore RAs
from that particular address:

ip6tables -A INPUT -s fe80::204:23ff:fe7a:fb3e \
  --protocol ipv6-icmp --icmpv6-type router-advertisement \
  -j DROP

Hope this is helpful to some,
-- 
Simon.

---

From: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 10:22:11 -0800 (PST)

> network will be weak or even worst in the support of any given widespread

You're kidding right? No host that I'm aware of ever set-out to build a 
poorly performing wireless network. From my perspective, with the 
exception of some spatially and temporarly localized issues the big 
problems have have been solved since tuesday morning.

> NOT an experiment, is a real need.

The ssh I've had up to 2001:468:d01:a2::80df:a2 has been up for one day 
1:35. Perhaps your ipv6 availability is tied to any link-layer 
availability problem you have.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       [email-masked]
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2

---

From: Simon Leinen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:30:00 +0100

Simon Leinen writes:
> Anyway, I finally learned how to configure filters on my Linux
> laptop, and found that the following command (as root) makes my box
> ignore RAs from that particular address:

>   --protocol ipv6-icmp --icmpv6-type router-advertisement \

A second source of bogus RAs has popped up, so currently I recommend:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
#!/bin/sh
evil_ll="fe80::204:23ff:fe7a:fb3e fe80::20c:f1ff:fe34:45c0"
ip6tables -F INPUT
for ll in ${evil_ll}
do
  ip6tables -A INPUT -s "${ll}" \
    --protocol ipv6-icmp --icmpv6-type router-advertisement \
    -j DROP
done
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An alternative would be to find out the addresses of the "real" IPv6
routers and block RAs from anywhere else.

Of course SEND (SEcure Neighbor Discovery) will solve this, right?
-- 
Simon.

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 10:07:16 -0800

My humor sense is non-existing, so definitively I'M NOT JOKING. Furthermore,
in my opinion, this list is not to make any kind of jokes.

Right now in the MIP6 meeting, it took to me more than 1 hour to be able to
get access to my email server to send a couple of very urgent emails.

The result of this is that, as you need to keep going with the daily work,
we may need to skip some of the sessions and lower the number of attendees
and contributors to IETF.

I hope this is not the trend in future meetings. We need a stable network
and again, if it will be weak in terms of supporting a given technology,
needs to be know in advance.

Regards,
Jordi

> De: Joel Jaeggli <[email-masked]>
> Fecha: Wed, 9 Nov 2005 10:22:11 -0800 (PST)
> Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
> CC: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
> Asunto: Re: jabber rooms
> 
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
>> confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
>> individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware
>> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
>> information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>