On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 01:40:09 -0400, Christopher Morrow said:
I wonder how much more painful just upgrading the dsl plant to support v6
would be vs deploying the cgn equipment and funneling users through that :(
The answer depends on whether the person making the decision thinks they'll
have
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
I wonder how much more painful just upgrading the dsl plant to support
v6 would be vs deploying the cgn equipment and funneling users through
that :(
IPv6 deployment is not a short term solution to IPv4 address depletion.
Would you be less upset
CGN is just a solution to save time, it is not a transition mechanism through
IPv6
At the end (IPv6 at home) you will need at list :
Dual stack or NAT64/ DNS64
My 2 cents
On Apr 7, 2013, at 8:42 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013, Christopher Morrow wrote:
I
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013, Fabien Delmotte wrote:
CGN is just a solution to save time, it is not a transition mechanism through
IPv6
At the end (IPv6 at home) you will need at list :
Dual stack or NAT64/ DNS64
CGN doesn't stop anyone deploying dual stack. NAT64/DNS64 is dead in the
water without
Well if the RFCs would just be set in stone already like Moses's 10
commandments
and if the programmers would actually start writing code for v6
and if the web site hosting servers would at least have dual stack
enabled on them
it would be great.
But till then we just change a RFC here,
Jimmy Hess mysi...@gmail.com writes:
On 4/6/13, Matthew Kaufman matt...@matthew.at wrote:
On 4/6/2013 6:24 PM, cb.list6 wrote:
I'd love to see a CGN box that is cheaper than IPv4 addresses currently
are on the transfer market.
You mean like a few linux servers running iptables
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 13:54:04 +0300, Alex said:
Well if the RFCs would just be set in stone already like Moses's 10
commandments
and if the programmers would actually start writing code for v6
and if the web site hosting servers would at least have dual stack
enabled on them
it would be
* Mikael Abrahamsson
My point is that people seem to scoff at CGN. There is nothing stopping
anyone putting in CGN for IPv4 (that has to be done to handle IPv4
address exhaustion), then giving dual stack for end users can be done at
any time.
Face it, we're running out of IPv4 addresses.
In MPLS network when we speak of utilization is 50% between 2 points in a
circuit , What does it mean and how can I measure it ?
Sent from my BlackBerry® via Smartfren EVDO Network
-Original Message-
From: nanog-requ...@nanog.org
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 02:11:21
To: nanog@nanog.org
I think Comcast is using CGN too!!! My IP address displayed on my MacBook is in
the 10.0.0.0/8 range, and ARIN website can't determine my IP address either.
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 6, 2013, at 9:33 PM, Joshua Smith juice...@gmail.com wrote:
Very interesting indeed. Way to do the right
* Mikael Abrahamsson
Otoh, ARIN isn't exhausted yet so getting IPv4 addresses there should
still be a lot cheaper than doing CGN?
From what I hear several ISPs in the ARIN region prefer to obtain
second-hand IPv4 addresses (or deploy CGN boxes) over requesting
addresses directly from ARIN, and
On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Derek Ivey wrote:
It would be nice to get an update from them regarding their IPv6 plans. Their
IPv6 support page still says they will start deploying 3Q12 :(.
I've been trying to get some information from internal contacts, but so
far, no go.
jms
I've continued to update my dataset originally posted about two weeks ago.
Please take a moment and review your CIDRs which may be running an open
resolver.
I've exposed one additional bit in the user-interface that may be helpful.
Some DNS servers will respond with RCODE=0 (OK) but not
Would you be less upset if there was IPv6 access and CPE based DS Lite
ds lite, nat in the core and cpe forklift. one of the worst mechanisms.
randy
On Apr 6, 2013, at 16:03 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sat, 06 Apr 2013 10:38:06 -0400, shawn wilson said:
What would break if u dropped all ICMP packets with redirects on public
facing boxes?
Presumably nothing, as long as you guaranteed that your IP address, netmask,
and routes
On Apr 7, 2013, at 00:31 , Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote:
On Sun, 7 Apr 2013, Fabien Delmotte wrote:
CGN is just a solution to save time, it is not a transition mechanism
through IPv6
At the end (IPv6 at home) you will need at list :
Dual stack or NAT64/ DNS64
CGN doesn't
If I'm an ISP deploying a network for users today, I effectively have to
provide some mechanism to allow those users to get to IPv4 only content.
There is way too much stuff out there that is IPv4 only today.
Yes, content providers should provide IPv6 accessbut if I'm an ISP, I
can't really
On 4/6/2013 11:33 PM, Huasong Zhou wrote:
I think Comcast is using CGN too!!! My IP address displayed on my MacBook is in
the 10.0.0.0/8 range, and ARIN website can't determine my IP address either.
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 6, 2013, at 9:33 PM, Joshua Smith juice...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. Comcast is not using any CGN, as much as I know.
Is your MacBook directly connected to the modem or a router? I presume the
latter.
Cheers,
Rajiv
Sent from my Phone
On Apr 7, 2013, at 11:47 AM, Huasong Zhou huas...@kalorama.com wrote:
I think Comcast is using CGN too!!! My IP address
DS-Lite is also CGN, it just happens to be done over IPv6 access. MAP is also
CGN.
Thankfully, MAP is not CGN. Correctly stated, unlike DS-Lite, MAP doesn't
require any CGN that causes the SP network to put up with the NAT state. This
means that all the subsequent issues of CGN/DS-Lite no
Dual-stack in the home networks will stay with us for a long time (beyond
2020!) until v4-only user devices and v4-only apps get refreshed.
Of course, this doesn't mean that the ISP access needs to stay dual-stack,
thanks to MAP, 464XLAT etc.
Cheers,
Rajiv
Sent from my Phone
On Apr 7, 2013,
In all fairness, upgrading the legacy last-mile e.g. DSL infrastructure to
support native IPv6 may be too expensive to make any economic sense.
Note that Vz FiOS users are not affected by this. And noting that Vz has ~5.5M
FiOS HSI customers and ~3M DSL customers (per the last earning report),
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 12:25:30 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
Presumably nothing, as long as you guaranteed that your IP address, netmask,
and routes actually match the reality of your network configuration.
They also cover the case where there are two (or more) routers on the
network and you
- Original Message -
From: Rajiv Asati (rajiva) raj...@cisco.com
Note that Vz FiOS users are not affected by this. And noting that Vz
has ~5.5M FiOS HSI customers and ~3M DSL customers (per the last
earning report), and noting that DSL network is not getting any new
investment (in
I can confirm CGN has not been deployed for Comcast customers.
=
John Jason Brzozowski
Comcast Cable
m) 609-377-6594
e) mailto:john_brzozow...@cable.comcast.com
o) 484-962-0060
w) http://www.comcast6.net
=
MAP is all about stateless (NAT64 of Encapsulation) and IPv6 enabled
access. MAP makes much more sense in any SP network having its internet
customers do IPv4 address sharing and embrace IPv6.
What may make 'much more sense' in one network, doesn't necessarily make
as much since in another
On Apr 7, 2013, at 18:47 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Sun, 07 Apr 2013 12:25:30 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
Presumably nothing, as long as you guaranteed that your IP address, netmask,
and routes actually match the reality of your network configuration.
They also cover the case where
On Apr 7, 2013, at 18:21 , Rajiv Asati (rajiva) raj...@cisco.com wrote:
Dual-stack in the home networks will stay with us for a long time (beyond
2020!) until v4-only user devices and v4-only apps get refreshed.
I disagree. I think that v4-only apps and devices will get relegated to being
On Apr 7, 2013, at 15:43 , Oliver Garraux oli...@g.garraux.net wrote:
If I'm an ISP deploying a network for users today, I effectively have to
provide some mechanism to allow those users to get to IPv4 only content.
There is way too much stuff out there that is IPv4 only today.
29 matches
Mail list logo
