Subject: Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

From: IETF Chair <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:07:01 -0500

Dear Colleagues:

I had no idea that my previous announcement would generate such a long
stream of responses.  The lively discussion has been surprising,
interesting, and also informative.  I need to share some history, some
plans, and some reactions to this lengthy discussion.

The IETF meeting network supported IPv6 for at least the last five years.
Both IPv4 and IPv6 routing have been available on all of the subnets in
the primary meeting venue, and that there have been IPv6 transit to the
greater Internet. The goal has been for this to be native IPv6 transit,
but tunnels have been required in some venues due to upstream provider
limitations or gross routing inefficiency in the native path. IPv6
addressing has recently employed a /32 that has been kindly made
available for the IETF meetings by APNIC.  Previously, IPv6 addressing
employed a per-meeting /48 allocation. Local meeting services, such as
DNS, NTP, LPR, and IPP, have been accessible using IPv6 via dual stack
on-site servers, and recently DHCPv6 has been added to provide IPv6
nameserver information.

Following the mail list discussion, we have considered several different
configurations for achieving the desired network experiment environment.
It is important that everyone have adequate opportunity for advance
configuration, and it is important that severe impact on other network
resources at the meeting venue be avoided.  With these goals in mind, we
intend to add an additional IPv6-only subnet, with a different SSID on
the wireless network.  The SSID will include some clever name that
includes the string "v6ONLY".  This SSID will be available on all the
wireless access points throughout the venue for the entire week.
Everyone is encouraged to try using this network well before the plenary
session.  Neighbors and friends are encouraged to help each other debug
problems, and the kind folks at the help desk in the Terminal Room will
also be happy to assist with any configuration challenges, IPv6-related
or otherwise.

During the plenary session, at a well advertised time, which will be
after the host greeting and several other information packed
presentations, all of the IPv4/IPv6 capable SSIDs (the usual ietf* ones
that have been available at meetings for the last few years) will be
disabled on the APs in and around the plenary room. Only the v6ONLY
network will be accessible to the plenary session attendees for 30 to 60
minutes. The APs outside the plenary room area, including the lobby, the
bar, and other public spaces, as well as the entire wired network, will
remain unchanged.  To ensure proper coverage of the public spaces with
both IPv4 and IPv6, there is likely to be some leakage of the IPv4-
enabled networks into the plenary room. The plenary attendees will be
asked to refrain from using them.  These resources will be overwhelmed if
all of the plenary attendees attempt to use them, so please leave them
for the people in the public spaces.  If you are in the plenary, please
participate in the experiment.  We are trying to figure out how to
display in real time the traffic statistics on the v6ONLY network during
the plenary.  I'm hoping it can be projected while the experiment is
running.

I should note that the IETF meeting network infrastructure will be
running on IPv4.  That is one reason that v6ONLY will be offered on the
wireless network.  Management traffic on the wired network needs IPv4.
Consider this the first item on the "not quite ready" list that will be
compiled during the experiment.

During the experiment, a mechanism to capture notes on the experience
will be made available.  We have not figured out whether a wiki, mail
list, jabber room, or something else will be employed.  The idea is to
gather the experience of the engineers that choose to participate in the
experiment. Please note that the IETF meeting network will provide IPv6
connectivity, name resolution, and transit, but any additional services
such as IPv6/IPv4 ALGs, are outside the scope of this experiment.  If
someone would like to use such a resource during this experiment, please
hold that thought.  A mail list will be set up and announced for this
kind of coordination.

This experiment is an opportunity for the IETF community to see what we
can make happen by IETF 71. IANA has accepted the challenge to get AAAA
records into the root zone.  I sincerely hope that they are successful.
Others are trying to get IPv6 service to servers that are often visited
by IETF meeting attendees.  I sincerely hope they are successful too.
Activities like these need milestones, otherwise they get pushed to the
back burner.  This plenary experiment is serving as one such milestone.

This experiment is also an opportunity for the engineers that make up the
IETF community to learn.  My ISP does not offer IPv6, so I have no hands-
on IPv6 experience.  This plenary experiment, and the v6ONLY network that
will be available the entire week, offer an opportunity for real hands-on
experimentation.  Even people that have this capability in their homes or
work environments will learn from helping others get their configurations
sorted out.  We all learn best from hands-on experience, not just talking
about what would happen if you could do it yourself.

Wishing you and your family a safe and warm holiday season,
   Russ Housley
   IETF Chair

At 04:39 PM 12/14/2007, IETF Chair wrote:
> Dear Colleagues:
>
> How dark is the IPv6 Internet?  Let's find out.
>
> During the IESG/IAOC Plenary at IETF 71, we are going to turn off IPv4
> support on the IETF network for 30 to 60 minutes.  We will encourage
> the audience to use the Internet and determine which services that they
> have come to take for granted remain available.
>
> If you are from a service provider, we encourage you to make your
> service a bright spot on the IPv6 Internet.
>
> To facilitate this experiment, a URL with instructions on how to get
> IPv6 running on Windows, Mac OS X, Linux, and so on.  Some information
> will also be available for a 4-to-6 tunnel.
>
> We will ask everyone to list things that work and things that do not.
> The results will be part of the proceedings for the plenary session.
>
> We will make more information about the structuring of this activity
> over the next few weeks.  Please do whatever you can to make ready ...
>
> Russ Housley
> IETF Chair

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:33:02 +0000

Russ
Congrats. The ripples from this are and will be significant. It certainly nudged ICANN
Best for the experiment. 
Happy holidays 
Ray
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: IETF Chair <[email-masked]>

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:07:01 
To:IETF Announcement list <[email-masked]>
Cc:[email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary 

Dear Colleagues:

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

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 14:53:28 -0500

--On Saturday, 22 December, 2007 13:07 -0500 IETF Chair
<[email-masked]> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues:
> 
> I had no idea that my previous announcement would generate
> such a long stream of responses.  The lively discussion has
> been surprising, interesting, and also informative.  I need to
> share some history, some plans, and some reactions to this
> lengthy discussion.
> 
> The IETF meeting network supported IPv6 for at least the last
> five years. Both IPv4 and IPv6 routing have been available on
>...
> Following the mail list discussion, we have considered several
> different configurations for achieving the desired network
> experiment environment. It is important that everyone have
> adequate opportunity for advance configuration, and it is
> important that severe impact on other network resources at the
> meeting venue be avoided.  With these goals in mind, we intend
> to add an additional IPv6-only subnet, with a different SSID on
>...

Russ,

>From my perspective at least, an excellent approach that
balances the issues well.

thanks,
   john

---

From: Ray Pelletier <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:46:05 -0500

>Congrats. The ripples from this are and will be significant. It certainly nudged ICANN
I erred. I was not aware of the background concerning the work underway 
at ICANN.. 
The timing by them will provide additional momentum to the efforts 
underway and the good work done by many over an extended period.

Ray

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:13:21 -0800

Since we started this thread my wireless network has had outage after outage. It cannot be a coincidence.
 
WiFi is great when it works, but debuging it is a PITA. 
 
The problem turns out to be that my WiFi router has passed its sell by date. It won't take new configuration, the flash memory is busted. My experience is that they are disposable items and last no more than 14 months. Orinocco, Linksys, Netgear, D-Link, I have had them all and they all die after a remarkably short life. And the Web configuration mechanisms for every single one is broken. 
 
So given that we have representatives of all the manufacturers here I would like to ask
 
1) What product can I buy today that supports IPv6?
 
2) What product can I buy today that is actually designed for a continuous service life of 3 years, always on?
 
My research indicates that the answer to both is 'none that costs less than $600'.

There is a silver lining however. From the point of view of IPv6 deployment we have a narrow window of opportunity. If we can develop a Transition-Box (T-Box) spec now we can expect it to roll out fairly quickly. These boxes simply don't last more than a few months.They are built cheap and shoddy.
 
Try to use the end point computer as the transition point and we are stuck waiting three, five or more years. Much better to leverage the part of the network that costs circa $50 rather $500-$5000 and currently requires regular replacement.
 
That situation won't last, eventually folk are going to humiliate the manufacturers into raising their game. YouTube is a powerful tool. Quality is going to have to rise or brands are on the line.

________________________________

	From: Ray Pelletier [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 9:46 PM
	To: [email-masked]
	Cc: [email-masked]
	Subject: Re: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

		Russ

	I erred. I was not aware of the background concerning the work underway at ICANN..  
	The timing by them will provide additional momentum to the efforts underway and the good work done by many over an extended period.
	
	Ray 

		Best for the experiment. 
		Happy holidays 
		Ray
		
		-----Original Message-----
		From: IETF Chair <[email-masked]> <mailto:[email-masked]> 
		
		Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 13:07:01 
		To:IETF Announcement list <[email-masked]> <mailto:[email-masked]> 
		Cc:[email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
		Subject: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary 

		Dear Colleagues:

		

		

		

			Dear Colleagues:

			

			
			
			Russ Housley
			IETF Chair

________________________________

---

From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 15:51:31 -0300

For products and services that support IPv6, take a look at:

http://www.ipv6-to-standard.org/

Regards,
Jordi

De: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Responder a: <[email-masked]>
Fecha: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:13:21 -0800
Para: <[email-masked]>
Conversación: Change the subject! RE: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for
IETF 71 Plenary
Asunto: Change the subject! RE: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71
Plenary

Since we started this thread my wireless network has had outage after
outage. It cannot be a coincidence.

The problem turns out to be that my WiFi router has passed its sell by date.
It won't take new configuration, the flash memory is busted. My experience
is that they are disposable items and last no more than 14 months. Orinocco,
Linksys, Netgear, D-Link, I have had them all and they all die after a
remarkably short life. And the Web configuration mechanisms for every single
one is broken. 
 
So given that we have representatives of all the manufacturers here I would
like to ask

2) What product can I buy today that is actually designed for a continuous
service life of 3 years, always on?
 
My research indicates that the answer to both is 'none that costs less than
$600'.

There is a silver lining however. From the point of view of IPv6 deployment
we have a narrow window of opportunity. If we can develop a Transition-Box
(T-Box) spec now we can expect it to roll out fairly quickly. These boxes
simply don't last more than a few months.They are built cheap and shoddy.
 
Try to use the end point computer as the transition point and we are stuck
waiting three, five or more years. Much better to leverage the part of the
network that costs circa $50 rather $500-$5000 and currently requires
regular replacement.
 
That situation won't last, eventually folk are going to humiliate the
manufacturers into raising their game. YouTube is a powerful tool. Quality
is going to have to rise or brands are on the line.

> The timing by them will provide additional  momentum to the efforts underway
> and the good work done by many over an  extended period.
> 
> Ray  
>> Best for the experiment.
>> Happy holidays 
>> Ray
>> <mailto:[email-masked]>

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

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

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: "TS Glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 08:08:48 -0800

The problem is whether the IETF is going to mandate that all must use IPv6. 
FWIW I have run into many people using down-rev laptop's for whom 
Microsoft's v6 implementation isn't ever going to be installed. If it is 
then the IETF is going to in doing so say "in order to participate at an 
IETF plenary that working parties must use IPv6 based services" and in many 
instances that would be a problem since under the most recent wireless 
ruling from the FCC no one can prevent anyone else from offering services in 
those wireless arenas' and so its simple. Someone else offers to insure v4 
transit is still available.

Todd Glassey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2007 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: Change the subject! RE: [IAOC] Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 
71 Plenary

Regards,
Jordi

> at
> ICANN..
> underway

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

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: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 21:18:41 -0800

Russ while I understand the IETF's intent to force the world to use v6 
instead of v4 addressing I dont approve of any process as an  experiment 
that limits access to meeting's or the networks around them.  While I 
understand that these are issues pertaining to outbound services, I still 
feel that its too soon to break this off and that both v4 and v6 should be 
run around the plenary and all IETF meeting sessions while you are testing 
the v6 traffic management system.

Todd Glassey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "IETF Chair" <[email-masked]>
To: "IETF Announcement list" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

> plans, and some reactions to this lengthy discushat its role is limited.  It 
> is a criticism to observe that an serious constituency thinks otherwise.

And a criticism of the IETF for not building controls which would assure its 
fair and open practices were a reality instead of what I refer to as 
"boilerplate fantasy's" IMHO.

Todd Glassey
>
> d/
>
> -- 
>
>   Dave Crocker
>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>   bbiw.net
>

---

From: "todd glassey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2007 21:18:41 -0800

Todd Glassey

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "IETF Chair" <[email-masked]>
To: "IETF Announcement list" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: IPv4 Outage Planned for IETF 71 Plenary

> This experiment is an opportunity for the IETF csion.
>

ommunity to see what we

---

From: "Frank Ellermann" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 02:05:34 +0100

TS Glassey wrote:
 
> Microsoft's v6 implementation isn't ever going to be installed.

See http://research.microsoft.com/msripv6/msripv6.htm - I found
that via Jordi's http://www.ipv6-to-standard.org/ link.  Apparently
an experimental IPv6 stack for NT and W2K.

For Phil's problem, products sold in Europe should survive 750 days,
14 months is too short.  Sent over a 12 years old USR Courier... ;-)

 Frank

---

From: Chris Lonvick <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 13:41:02 -0800 (PST)

Hi,

Several people have written on this thread that they might not participate 
in this experiment because they either won't have an IPv6 stack or that 
they're unwilling to experiment with the network settings on their PCs. 
I'll suggest that those people can double their experimental fun in a very 
low risk way by booting a live linux distribution during the experiment.

For those people who may be unfamiliar with this, look at this Wikipedia 
entry:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LiveDistro

I burned a few CDs today and got the following results:
- Ubuntu boots with IPv4 and IPv6 active.  It also has several
   applications which may be good for testing: web browser, ssh, pidgin
   (with XMPP for jabber), and Ekiga softphone.
- Mandriva booted without activating the network ports.  A few clicks
   activated them and it appeared to enable IPv6.  Similar applications
   as above with kopete but I didn't immediately spot a softphone.
- Fedora booted with IPv4 enabled.  I couldn't activate IPv6 by just
   clicking on things.  ymmv

Best regards,
Chris

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:02:02 -0800

Chris Lonvick wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Several people have written on this thread that they might not 
> participate in this experiment because they either won't have an IPv6 
> stack or that they're unwilling to experiment with the network settings 
> on their PCs. I'll suggest that those people can double their 
> experimental fun in a very low risk way by booting a live linux 
> distribution during the experiment.

While this looks like helpful information, for those able to use it, I think 
the point that the core point is still being missed:

      Some folks do not have that kind of control over their laptops.  They 
work for organizations which keep strict control over the software on the 
machines and/or the attendee does not happen to be someone who messes around 
with changes to their operating system.

While the press for testing IPv6 scenarios and demonstrating how to make many 
different ones work is definitely a Good Thing, the coercive quality about the 
approach to this particular exercise has an oddly macho tone:

      Real Geeks Hack Their Laptops.

In reality, it is entirely reasonable -- and for most of the world, essential 
-- for people to distinguish between a production platform and an experimental 
one, and to treat their mobile office platform as production.

Given the urgent need to get IPv6 more fully used, there is probably a good 
argument for forcing a public event like this (if it goes well... and maybe 
even if it doesn't) but we really ought to acknowledge that some attendees are 
disenfranchised.

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker