Subject: Vienna wireless/networking...

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 21:08:32 +0100

Randy's comments on the Vienna wireless at the IESG tonight are spot on.
The network's been great all week.

Given the WLAN problems seen in so many other events (IETF and otherwise) 
could I ask that the network be publicly documented as a guide for those 
providing WLAN in the future?   It would be really helpful.

The IPv6 has also been good when I've tried - less than 10ms to hop onto
either 6NET (for my home NREN access) or GEANT (for example for Japan)
from the venue :)   

I think there have been some IPv6 blips, but not through local problems.

Good job - and a high standard for Minneapolis to match!

Tim

---

From: "Jeroen Massar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 22:48:19 +0200

Tim Chown wrote:

<SNIP>
> The IPv6 has also been good when I've tried - less than 10ms 
> to hop onto either 6NET (for my home NREN access) or GEANT
> (for example for Japan) from the venue :)   

I heared a lot of complaints to anything outside 6net/geant/dante though.

Watching the looking glasses reveals that 6net/geant/dante
simply don't peer enough with commercial ISP's.

Good example is the www.deepspace6.net thread.

For example, a simply trace from my home to that box:

traceroute to deepspace6.net (3ffe:8300:0:1:10:a7ff:fe16:27f4) from
3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:bbab, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets
 1  purgatory.unfix.org (3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f)  2.6 ms
2.216 ms  2.078 ms
 2  gw-20.ams-02.nl.sixxs.net (3ffe:8114:1000::26)  20.494 ms  21.748 ms
21.354 ms
 3  2001:6e0::2 (2001:6e0::2)  20.647 ms  21.43 ms  20.869 ms
 4  gw-viagenie-cnit.ipv6.cnit.it (3ffe:830f::3)  127.75 ms  127.818 ms
128.406 ms
 5  gw-cnit-viagenie.ipv6.cnit.it (3ffe:830f::2)  292.836 ms *  292.115 ms
 6  gw-fe-na.ipv6.cnit.it (3ffe:8300::4)  314.947 ms *  316.817 ms
 7  3ffe:8300:0:1:10:a7ff:fe16:27f4 (3ffe:8300:0:1:10:a7ff:fe16:27f4)
318.12 ms  316.753 ms  320.819 ms

gw-viagenie-cnit, aha we are going over the US?
That would look like intouch at AMS-IX would have bad connectivity,
even though I know that AMS-IX is one of the better places to peer with
IPv6.

And now the fun part, same box, RIR prefix:

jeroen@heaven:~$ traceroute6 www.deepspace6.net
traceroute to deepspace6.net (2001:760:204:10:10:a7ff:fe16:27f4) from
3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:bbab, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets
 1  purgatory.unfix.org (3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f)  9.787 ms
1.627 ms  1.924 ms
 2  gw-20.ams-02.nl.sixxs.net (3ffe:8114:1000::26)  50.029 ms  20.31 ms
20.147 ms
 3  2001:6e0::2 (2001:6e0::2)  19.823 ms  20.262 ms  20.967 ms
 4  gw.ipv6.lt (2001:778:11:5::1)  80.526 ms  79.947 ms  79.496 ms
 5  2001:6e0:0:10f::2 (2001:6e0:0:10f::2)  68.388 ms  68.343 ms  68.664 ms
 6  6net-gw.nordu.net (2001:948:0:f008::1)  70.851 ms  69.125 ms  69.524 ms
 7  * * *
 8  * * *
 9  *

http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?prefix=3ffe:8300::/28&matchtype=more
http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?prefix=2001:760::/32&matchtype=more

Backs this up, where you can see that most 'transit' goes over viagenie ==
us.
PS: Both 2001:760::/32 and 2001:760::/35 are announced with different paths
;)

Note that the IETF prefix, apparently has a somewhat better route
mysteriously:

http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?prefix=2001:7f9:8400:d1::/32&matchtype=mo
re

jeroen@heaven:~$ traceroute6 2001:7f9:8400:d1::2
traceroute to 2001:7f9:8400:d1::2 (2001:7f9:8400:d1::2) from
3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:bbab, 30 hops max, 16 byte packets
 1  purgatory.unfix.org (3ffe:8114:2000:240:290:27ff:fe24:c19f)  1.191 ms
1.427 ms  1.274 ms
 2  gw-20.ams-02.nl.sixxs.net (3ffe:8114:1000::26)  19.896 ms  20.129 ms
20.081 ms
 3  2001:6e0::2 (2001:6e0::2)  29.802 ms  20.869 ms  20.15 ms
 4  gw.ipv6.lt (2001:778:11:5::1)  79.846 ms  81.081 ms  79.084 ms
 5  * * *
 6  * * *
 7  * * *
 8  aconet-gw.at1.at.geant.net (2001:798:2010:10dd::2)  79.834 ms  78.767 ms
79.544 ms
 9  2001:628:4fe::8447 (2001:628:4fe::8447)  80.355 ms  80.578 ms  80.872 ms
10  2001:890:600:4f1::2 (2001:890:600:4f1::2)  81.057 ms  80.481 ms  81.882
ms
Borked, jups indeed 6net has great connectivity, when you stay in the
acedemic world...

Not traceable though, and ofcourse quite asynchronous...

</sarcasme>

Greets,
 Jeroen