Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
Hi, On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed. Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start doing stuff now to increase the usage efficiencies Do we really *want* that? I'd rather go for legacy-free networks. Ditch v4, build proper v6 networks. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 66629 (65398) SpaceNet AG Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:38:21 PST, Tony Hain said: all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), They said that just before CIDR happened, too. We are already out of addresses. I cannot easily connect from my laptop in my apartment (behind a NAT) with a friend's laptop in his apartment (because it is also behind a NAT). This makes quickly transferring pictures or documents from my machine to a friend's machine a pain in the neck. We ran out of addresses for practical purposes years ago. Anyone who is running a NAT is doing so because it was easier to do that than to try to get address space. Perry ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
The need you describe is the true need of the users. What they discuss is IPv6 as an IPv4 patch better than NATs. You discuss tier to tier exchanges. This is almost a different vision of the network. A vision IPv6 is properly design to support. The problem acknowledged by Michel Py and Steve Crocker, and others, mainly comes from the a la IPv4 management of the IPv6 addressing plan. Innovation is blocked there. This is to do with ICANN's IANA and numbering plan organization and intergovernance, not with IPv6. Please read Mr. Zhao's contribution drafts for ITU on the matter if you find one (I understand that he plans releasing his position by mid-November?). You document THE main need for IPv6: to permit a flexible management of tier and tier universal relations. For a while NAT helped a lot - and will continue and improve - at intranet level. But end-users need much more: a full control, that only IPv6 can deliver, as you show it. When an adequate IPv6 addressing plan is offered and used by end-users, NATs will disappear as useless, costly and obsolete constraints. You cannot change things on the internet, you can only improve them and make them obsolete. jfc At 03:31 07/11/2004, Perry E. Metzger wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:38:21 PST, Tony Hain said: all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), They said that just before CIDR happened, too. We are already out of addresses. I cannot easily connect from my laptop in my apartment (behind a NAT) with a friend's laptop in his apartment (because it is also behind a NAT). This makes quickly transferring pictures or documents from my machine to a friend's machine a pain in the neck. We ran out of addresses for practical purposes years ago. Anyone who is running a NAT is doing so because it was easier to do that than to try to get address space. Perry ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
Harald, I would like to congratulate you on your successes, and suggest you have the opportunity to be the last chair to preside over active work related to version 4 of the IP protocol suite. With the publication of the tunneling drafts that v6ops has been sitting on, there is no further need to discuss 32 bit address objects. At the same time, there is really no further justification for any other IETF working group to be discussing 32 bit addresses in current work. With all due respect to Geoff's efforts to document the address growth rate in the routing system, even he acknowledges that measure lags the allocation timeframe and assumes the RIRs will recover all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), it should be clear to everyone that products that rely on current standards activities will appear in the market place after the central pool of 32 bit values has run dry. As such I would recommend your legacy include an active review of all working group discussions next week for items related to IPv4, followed by closure of all 32 bit address related work items before your departure in March. Tony -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harald Tveit Alvestrand Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Stepping down as IETF chair in March Thomas' note reminded me that there are probably some people who haven't heard this yet I'm stepping down as IETF chair in March, and I am not a candidate for reappointment. It's been a great four years, containing lots of learning experience, lots of hard work and lots of joy - but after four years as IETF chair, and ten years total on the IESG/IAB, March seems an appropriate time for me to leave this stage of my life behind. The IETF is a great organization. I will enjoy watching it continue to grow and prosper under new leadership. Thank you! Harald ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:38:21 PST, Tony Hain said: all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), They said that just before CIDR happened, too. From the routing-table summary posted to the NANOG list this morning: Number of addresses announced to Internet: 1348239976 Equivalent to 80 /8s, 92 /16s and 130 /24s Percentage of available address space announced: 36.4 Percentage of allocated address space announced: 58.8 Percentage of available address space allocated: 61.9 So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed. Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start doing stuff now to increase the usage efficiencies pgpIFns3aBZWy.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:48:16 +0100, Gert Doering said: Hi, On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed. Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start doing stuff now to increase the usage efficiencies Do we really *want* that? I'd rather go for legacy-free networks. Ditch v4, build proper v6 networks. Well.. that *would* be a preferable solution. I was merely pointing out that we're not quite as up against the wall as a projection of the burn rate of /8's would indicate. pgpHcGXT8GUwZ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
Folks, (v6ops WG co-chair hat on) While this is an important and probably an entertaining topic when it's complete, it will be sufficient to discuss it at the IETF list. Please DO NOT send further messages on v6ops list! (hat off) On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Tony Hain wrote: I would like to congratulate you on your successes, and suggest you have the opportunity to be the last chair to preside over active work related to version 4 of the IP protocol suite. With the publication of the tunneling drafts that v6ops has been sitting on, there is no further need to discuss 32 bit address objects. At the same time, there is really no further justification for any other IETF working group to be discussing 32 bit addresses in current work. With all due respect to Geoff's efforts to document the address growth rate in the routing system, even he acknowledges that measure lags the allocation timeframe and assumes the RIRs will recover all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's over a 6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's remain in the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), it should be clear to everyone that products that rely on current standards activities will appear in the market place after the central pool of 32 bit values has run dry. As such I would recommend your legacy include an active review of all working group discussions next week for items related to IPv4, followed by closure of all 32 bit address related work items before your departure in March. Tony -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Harald Tveit Alvestrand Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:20 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Stepping down as IETF chair in March Thomas' note reminded me that there are probably some people who haven't heard this yet I'm stepping down as IETF chair in March, and I am not a candidate for reappointment. It's been a great four years, containing lots of learning experience, lots of hard work and lots of joy - but after four years as IETF chair, and ten years total on the IESG/IAB, March seems an appropriate time for me to leave this stage of my life behind. The IETF is a great organization. I will enjoy watching it continue to grow and prosper under new leadership. Thank you! Harald ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf -- Pekka Savola You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oykingdom bleeds. Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
Of course not, please we don't want, neither need/should, do that ! If we decide to do that, let's say to the world folks, IETF lost its direction. Regards, Jordi De: Gert Doering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fecha: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 22:48:16 +0100 Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: Tony Hain [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'Harald Tveit Alvestrand' [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], 'Pekka Savola' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: Re: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities.. Hi, On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed. Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start doing stuff now to increase the usage efficiencies Do we really *want* that? I'd rather go for legacy-free networks. Ditch v4, build proper v6 networks. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 66629 (65398) SpaceNet AG Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 ** Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit Presentations and videos on line 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. ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
RE: Stepping down as IETF chair in March - - RE: A personal take on WG's priorities..
Fred Baker wrote: Guys - please... maybe it's just me, but it seems like this thread should be something about Harald. Coopting it to the continued wars between various competing technology religions seems just a tad disrespectful. Could you at least change the subject line if we're going to go into this rathole again? Well said. At 10:48 PM 11/05/04 +0100, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 04:31:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So 40% isn't even *allocated* yet (saying that we're probably burning /8's faster than needed, but only 36% of the available space is actually routed. Sounds to me like we've got more time than 52 months, if we start doing stuff now to increase the usage efficiencies Do we really *want* that? I'd rather go for legacy-free networks. Ditch v4, build proper v6 networks. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 66629 (65398) SpaceNet AG Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299 ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf Hope this helps, ~gwz Why is it that most of the world's problems can't be solved by simply listening to John Coltrane? -- Henry Gabriel ___ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
