That's just the storage, right, not actual compute? 



----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 




----- Original Message -----

From: "Josh Reynolds" <j...@kyneticwifi.com> 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 5:19:03 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 


https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-ipv6-support-for-amazon-s3/ 


On Oct 27, 2016 2:49 PM, "Mike Hammett" < af...@ics-il.net > wrote: 




Anyone in AWS won't, given AWS's poor to no IPv6 support. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 






From: "Jason Wilson" < ja...@remotelylocated.com > 
To: af@afmug.com 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 2:48:07 PM 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 



Is sonar the only CRM that supports IPV6? 


I know currently Visp Does not. 






Jason Wilson 
Remotely Located 
Providing High Speed Internet to out of the way places. 
530-651-1736 
530-748-9608 Cell 
www.remotelylocated.com 

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 12:37 PM, Simon Westlake < simon@sonar.software > 
wrote: 

<blockquote>

What do you mean, 'even Sonar'? We aren't chopped liver! 


On 10/27/2016 2:12 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote: 

<blockquote>


I would totally agree here. We have deployed IPv6 quite a bit for clients, our 
networks etc. However, the major issue is the hosting companies, most big guys, 
google, amazon, etc all support IPv6, heck even Sonar does now! Hahah, but 
until the cost of IPv4 addresses is so high that no one; even the major guys 
can afford it, IPv6 deployment will keep stalling. 



Dennis Burgess – Network Solution Engineer – Consultant 
MikroTik Certified Trainer/Consultant – MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE 

For Wireless Hardware/Routers visit www.linktechs.net 
Radio Frequiency Coverages: www.towercoverage.com 
Office: 314-735-0270 
E-Mail: dmburg...@linktechs.net 



From: Af [ mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com ] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart 
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 2:00 PM 
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 

Actually in my opinion what we need is better IPv6 adoption in general and this 
becomes a non-problem quickly :) 



I know .. good theory … and “we” are getting better though …. a lot of 
providers have gotten their heads out of the clouds in the past few years alone 
…. 





<blockquote>


On Oct 27, 2016, at 2:26 PM, Chuck McCown < ch...@wbmfg.com > wrote: 






What we all need, is a low cost solution to stop needing more V4 IPs. 



If it is CGN at the edge with a limited pool of V4, so be it. 



But I want a solid solution that can be trusted. 

And I want and expert to come drop it into my company. 






From: Paul Stewart 

Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 11:23 AM 

To: af@afmug.com 

Subject: Re: [AFMUG] [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 



while I’m not a fan of NAT64, CGN etc (but understand in some situations the 
need for it), I completely agree that companies will be looking for consultants 
to help with this in some scenarios (both large and small companies alike) - 
this has been ongoing in some larger companies for many years already (IPv6 
adoption) and often through resident engineer placements from vendors 








<blockquote>


On Oct 27, 2016, at 11:59 AM, Chuck McCown < ch...@wbmfg.com > wrote: 







Some consultant needs to specialize in this and help folks provision, 
configure, deploy, test etc. 

We all need this or will need this. 






From: Faisal Imtiaz 

Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2016 8:31 PM 

To: af 

Subject: [AFMUG] Fwd: [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 





An excellent detailed solution (from one of the other forums). 



Faisal Imtiaz 
Snappy Internet & Telecom 
7266 SW 48 Street 
Miami, FL 33155 
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 

Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net 





<blockquote>

From: "Tim Way" < t...@way.vg > 
To: "WISPA General List" < wirel...@wispa.org > 
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:01:51 PM 
Subject: Re: [WISPA] IPV6 deploymernt 



<blockquote>


Art, 

So I know of two solid methods that could solve your problem. Neither are super 
awesome and both would involve NAT. 



1. IPv6 only to the client with NAT64 and DNS64 to handle IPv4 only 
connectivity 

2. IPv4 CGN Shared Address Space, RFC 6598 100.64.0.0/10 , and IPv6 Global 
Unicast running in Dual Stack 



Either one would work. I apologize in advance for the long post that follows. 



I've only done the configurations on Cisco routers with the radios just passing 
traffic at layer 2. I'd have to check the feature set of your routers routing 
wise but it shouldn't be hard. It also could be built in a lab with static 
routing largely. I think Mikrotik supports NAT64 but again for a lab 
environment any recent Cisco device could be used with IP Services licensing. 



Your address plan for your global unicast IPv6 space comes into play. This is 
how I would lab it up including moving routing to the tower with the CPE in 
bridge mode: 



Your fictional IPv6 prefix: 9999:8888::/32 



Your NAT64 Prefix: 9999:8888:cc00::/96 



Customer DHCPv6-PD Allocation Prefix: 9999:8888:aa00::/40 

Your fictional customer #1: The Johnson Family, 9999:8888:aa00:0100::/56 

Your fictional customer #2: The Billings' Family, 9999:8888:aa00:0200::/56 



Fictional Tower 1 


ISP Mgmt VLAN of CPE: 11, 9999:8888:bb00:0011::/64 

ISP Customer VLAN of CPE: 12, 9999:8888:bb00:0012::/64 

ISP Router at the tower on VLAN 11: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::1/64 

ISP Router at the tower on VLAN 12: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::1/64 



The Johnson Family Setup: 

ISP CPE VLAN 11 IP: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::f/64 

Customer's Netgear WAN Interface: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::f/64 

Customer's Netgear LAN Interface: 9999:8888:aa00:010a::1/64 

Customer's Netgear Guest WiFi: 9999:8888:aa00:010b::1/64 



The Billings' Family Setup: 


ISP CPE VLAN 11 IP: 9999:8888:bb00:0011::e/64 

Customer's Netgear WAN Interface: 9999:8888:bb00:0012::e/64 


Customer's Netgear LAN Interface: 9999:8888:aa00:020a::1/64 

Customer's Netgear Guest WiFi: 9999:8888:aa00:020b::1/64 



1. You'd bridge VLAN 12 through the CPE to customer's WAN interface as the 
native VLAN and put the IP on VLAN 11. 

2. If you use static routing and manual address assignment to eliminate 
variables in the lab you'll want to add static routes on the tower router for 
the ::/56 prefixes that would be allocated to each customer. Normally these 
routes will be injected into the routing table at the DHCPv6 router and could 
be distributed from there. 

3. The last piece of the puzzle will be adding in the NAT64 and DNS64 devices. 
BIND can do DNS64 and you could use a Cisco router to do the NAT64. You'd want 
the "Customer's Netgear" to use the DNS64 server as it's upstream DNS server to 
ensure that it receives AAAA records for sites that only have A records. This 
is the fragile component of the DNS64 and NAT64 deployment because it requires 
the customers computer or router uses your resolver. You will want to ensure 
the router performing NAT64 is advertising the prefix it is using for NAT64 
into your IGP or that your default routed traffic lands on that NAT64 to ensure 
it is routed correctly. 


This should get you a functional IPv6 only customer network that only returns 
AAAA records for all DNS requests. It's a little late so I apologize for any 
mistakes in the addressing. Also I will think about doing this with routing at 
the CPE as well overnight and add that response. I'd be very intrigued to see 
this in a lab environment with the fictional customers all setup to see how 
NAT64 and DNS64 actually works in reality instead of just implementing CGN 
which I see as the less visible or resilient change for the customer. That said 
I see the pure IPv6 deployment with NAT64 and DNS64 as the better long term 
solution if you could reliably ensure your customers use your DHCP server or 
ensure that your tech support says to reset that right away. It also would 
break a customer using OpenDNS to restrict web-sites from their kid's for 
example. 



Thanks, 



Tim 




On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Art Stephens < asteph...@ptera.com > wrote: 


<blockquote>


Tim, 

So we are an IPV4 ISP not able to get any more IPV4 address space. We have IPV6 
working in office, and on server network. 

I have working windows and linux IPV6 only configured machines but obviously 
they can only access IPV6 capable web sites and such. 




But we will need to start assigning IPV6 WAN address to customer routers and 
UBNT radios in radio router mode when we get a CRM that supports IPV6. 

I am a little aware of NAT64 but all my googling for NAT64 applications yields 
NAT64 for networks with Public address on one side and private addresses on the 
other. 

We try to keep all of our network WAN on public addresses. 



So far I have tried three so called ipv6 ready routers and could get none of 
them to work with static IPV6 addressing. 



Hope that explains what you are looking for. 



Thanks for your help. 








On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Tim Way < t...@way.vg > wrote: 


<blockquote>


Dual stack is a different architecture than having two separate networks 
running with one running IPv4 and one running IPv6. To connect the two 
disparate networks you would need to perform address family translation 
(NAT64). In dual-stack it will prefer IPv6 when available, minus happy 
eyeballs, but otherwise has legs or transit via both protocols to access the 
necessary resource if it is either IPv4 or IPv6. 

To start I would ask to clarify what you are trying to do and I'd be happy to 
help in anyway I can. I'm a bit of an IPv6 crazy. 



Tim 




On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:41 PM, Art Stephens < asteph...@ptera.com > wrote: 


<blockquote>


Any out there successfully deployed dual stack network can share what equipment 
used for pure ipv6 access to ipv4 networks? 

-- 




Arthur Stephens 

Senior Networking Technician 

Ptera Inc. 
PO Box 135 
24001 E Mission Suite 50 
Liberty Lake, WA 99019 
509-927-7837 

ptera.com | 

facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
"This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is 
intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. 
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or 
opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not 
intended to represent those of the company." 

_______________________________________________ 
Wireless mailing list 
wirel...@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
</blockquote>




_______________________________________________ 
Wireless mailing list 
wirel...@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
</blockquote>




-- 




Arthur Stephens 

Senior Networking Technician 

Ptera Inc. 
PO Box 135 
24001 E Mission Suite 50 
Liberty Lake, WA 99019 
509-927-7837 

ptera.com | 

facebook.com/PteraInc | twitter.com/Ptera 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
"This message may contain confidential and/or propriety information, and is 
intended for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. 
Any use by others is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or 
opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not 
intended to represent those of the company." 

_______________________________________________ 
Wireless mailing list 
wirel...@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
</blockquote>




_______________________________________________ 
Wireless mailing list 
wirel...@wispa.org 
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless 
</blockquote>

</blockquote>



</blockquote>


</blockquote>

-- 
Simon Westlake
Skype: Simon_Sonar
Email: simon@sonar.software Phone: (702) 447-1247 ---------------------------
Sonar Software Inc
The future of ISP billing and OSS https://sonar.software 
</blockquote>



</blockquote>

Reply via email to