Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/16/21 07:49, Matthew Petach wrote:



Isn't that a result of ERCOT stubbornly refusing to interconnect with 
the rest of the national grid, out of an irrational fear of coming 
under federal regulation?


I suspect that trying to be self-sufficient works most of the 
time--but when you get to the edges of the bell curve locally, your 
ability to be resilient and survive depends heavily upon your ability 
to be supported by others around you.  This certainly holds true for 
individual humans; I suspect power grids aren't that different.


If there was a state-wide blackout, they'd need to restart from the 
national grid anyway. Why not have some standing interconnection 
agreement with them anyway, that gets activated in cases such as these?


Sorry, unfamiliar with U.S. politics in this regard, so just doing 1+1.

Mark.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Matthew Petach]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 8:50 PM Sean Donelan  wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2021, Cory Sell via NANOG wrote:
> > adoption. Sure, wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on
> failed
> > in a massive way.
>
> Strange the massive shortages and failures are only in one state.
>
> The extreme cold weather extends northwards across many states, which
> aren't reporting rolling blackouts.
>

Isn't that a result of ERCOT stubbornly refusing to interconnect with the
rest of the national grid, out of an irrational fear of coming under
federal regulation?

I suspect that trying to be self-sufficient works most of the time--but
when you get to the edges of the bell curve locally, your ability to be
resilient and survive depends heavily upon your ability to be supported by
others around you.  This certainly holds true for individual humans; I
suspect power grids aren't that different.

Matt

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Yang Yu]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:49 PM Sean Donelan  wrote:
> Strange the massive shortages and failures are only in one state.

sounds familiar, even connected to a much bigger grid
http://www.caiso.com/Documents/Final-Root-Cause-Analysis-Mid-August-2020-Extreme-Heat-Wave.pdf

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Erik Sundberg]

Latest from Equinix as of 10PM 2/15


Dear Equinix Customer,

IBX(s):DA3
IBX Address:1950 North Stemmons Freeway Suites 1039A & 2048 Dallas, TX 75207
Ticket#:5-204633870202
Date and Time of Occurrence:15-FEB-2021 02:46 Site Local Time
Date and Time Update Reported:15-FEB-2021 21:58 Site Local Time

INCIDENT SUMMARY:IBX Utility Disturbance - Customer Loads Transferred

UPDATE:

Equinix IBX Site Staff reports that the utility vendor has advised that there 
will be rotating outages. The IBX will remain on generator power until utility 
power is stable. The fuel vendor has advised of an ETA on 16-FEB-2021 10:00 
Site Local Time for the fuel delivery. All loads remain stable on generator 
power. IBX Engineers will continue to monitor for stability.

 * Situation Status:  Stable
 * Equipment/Condition:  IBX Utility Disturbance - Customer Loads 
Transferred
 * Current System Redundancy:  Reduced Redundancy
 * Resources on Site/Pending:  N/A
 * Generator Fuel Run Time (hrs.):  Gen 1A- 38 hours/ DA3.2 Gen A - 48 
Hours -Gen B – 48 Hours
 * Current Colo Temperature Status: N/A
 * Current Colo Humidity RH Status:  N/A

The next update will be sent when there is a significant change to the 
situation.



From: NANOG  on behalf of 
Matthew Crocker 
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 7:46 PM
To: Eric Kuhnke ; nanog@nanog.org list 
Subject: Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator


They are most likely part of a demand load shedding program and are being paid 
to run off generator.



From: NANOG  on behalf of 
Eric Kuhnke 
Date: Monday, February 15, 2021 at 5:10 PM
To: "nanog@nanog.org list" 
Subject: Infomart Dallas is on generator





I have now heard from two reliable sources that Infomart Dallas is presently on 
generator, and is likely to remain so until the cold weather/electrical supply 
emergency in Texas has abated. No network impact seen yet.







CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or 
previous e-mail messages attached to it may contain confidential information 
that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person 
responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby 
notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the 
information contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY 
PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error please notify the 
sender immediately by replying to this e-mail. You must destroy the original 
transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner.
Thank you.

RE: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Cory Sell via NANOG]

Total population is a pretty big difference as you go north, as is how well 
infrastructure is actually prepared for snow/ice and cold temperatures in 
general.

I’ve been without power all day and have no doubt I’ll cross the 24-hour mark 
here in a handful of hours.

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:42 PM, Sean Donelan  wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Feb 2021, Cory Sell via NANOG wrote:
>> adoption. Sure, wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on failed
>> in a massive way.
>
> Strange the massive shortages and failures are only in one state.
>
> The extreme cold weather extends northwards across many states, which
> aren't reporting rolling blackouts.

RE: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Sean Donelan]

On Tue, 16 Feb 2021, Cory Sell via NANOG wrote:

adoption. Sure, wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on failed
in a massive way.


Strange the massive shortages and failures are only in one state.

The extreme cold weather extends northwards across many states, which 
aren't reporting rolling blackouts.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Sean Donelan]

Electric prices on the Texas spot market are $9,000/MWh.  Normally they 
are less than $15/MWh. During the summer months, Texas spot market prices 
have gone to zero because it has excess summertime wind turbine capacity. 
I suspect those are computer generated artificial prices, because there 
is no excess capacity for sale.  Sorta like the fake Amazon maketplace 
prices on out-of-stock products.


Netblocks is now reporting Internet outages (about 70% availability) have 
expanded across northern Mexico due to Natural Gas shortages for power 
plants in Mexico because of the demand in Texas.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/16/21 06:34, Cory Sell wrote:

Ercot has already released actual documentation of the outputs. Wind 
is NOT the biggest loss here. Even if wind was operating at 100% 
capacity, we’d be in the same boat due to gas and fossil fuel-related 
generation being decimated. Estimated 4GW lost for wind doesn’t make 
up for the 30GW+ estimated being lost from fossil fuels.


I only interject because people are already pointing their fingers at 
renewables being the cause here and trying to pawn off the blame to 
wind/solar to further their agendas to reduce renewable energy R and 
adoption. Sure, wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on 
failed in a massive way.


That much generation loss from a wind farm would surprise me.

Mark.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/16/21 06:17, Robert Jacobs wrote:

How about letting us Texans have more natural gas power plants or even 
let the gas be delivered to the plants we have so they can provide 
more power in an emergency. Did not help that 20% of our power is now 
wind which of course in an ice storm like we are having is shut off... 
Lots of issues and plenty of politics involved here..


Did I see somewhere that gas lines also got frozen, or was that just the 
windmills?


I feel for you and the rest of Texas. Cold weather has never been my thing.

Mark.

RE: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Cory Sell via NANOG]

Ercot has already released actual documentation of the outputs. Wind is NOT the 
biggest loss here. Even if wind was operating at 100% capacity, we’d be in the 
same boat due to gas and fossil fuel-related generation being decimated. 
Estimated 4GW lost for wind doesn’t make up for the 30GW+ estimated being lost 
from fossil fuels.

I only interject because people are already pointing their fingers at 
renewables being the cause here and trying to pawn off the blame to wind/solar 
to further their agendas to reduce renewable energy R and adoption. Sure, 
wind isn’t perfect, but looks like solution relied on failed in a massive way.

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 10:17 PM, Robert Jacobs  wrote:

> How about letting us Texans have more natural gas power plants or even let 
> the gas be delivered to the plants we have so they can provide more power in 
> an emergency. Did not help that 20% of our power is now wind which of course 
> in an ice storm like we are having is shut off... Lots of issues and plenty 
> of politics involved here..
>
> Robert Jacobs​
> | Data Center Manager
>
> http://www.pslightwave.com/
>
> Direct:   [832-615-7742](tel:832-615-7742)
> Mobile:   [281-830-2092](tel:281-830-2092)
> Main: 832‑615‑8000
> Fax:  713-510-1650
>
> 5959 Corporate Dr. Suite 3300; Houston, TX 77036
>
> [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/pslightwave/)
> [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/company/pslightwave)
> [Twitter](https://twitter.com/PSLightwave)
>
> http://www.pslightwave.com/   A Certified Woman‑Owned Business
> 24x7x365 Customer Support: 832-615-8000 | supp...@pslightwave.com
>
> ​This electronic message contains information from PS Lightwave which may be 
> privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of 
> individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, 
> any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this 
> information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in 
> error, please notify me by telephone or e-mail immediately.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG  On Behalf Of 
> Mark Tinka
> Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 10:06 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts
>
> On 2/16/21 04:14, Sean Donelan wrote:
>>
>> Poweroutage.us posted a terrific map, showing the jurisdictional
>> borders of the Texas power outages versus the storm related power
>> outages elsewhere in the country.
>>
>> https://twitter.com/PowerOutage_us/status/1361493394070118402
>>
>>
>> Sometimes infrastructure planning failures are not due to "natural
>> hazards."
>
> I suppose having some kind of home backup solution wouldn't be too bad right 
> now, even though you may still not get access to services. But at least, you 
> can brew some coffee, and charge your pulse oximetre.
>
> Mark.

RE: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Robert Jacobs]

How about letting us Texans have more natural gas power plants or even let the 
gas be delivered to the plants we have so they can provide more power in an 
emergency.  Did not help that 20% of our power is now wind which of course in 
an ice storm like we are having is shut off... Lots of issues and plenty of 
politics involved here..


Robert Jacobs
 | Data Center Manager
Direct: 832-615-7742
Mobile: 281-830-2092
Main: 832-615-8000
Fax: 713-510-1650
5959 Corporate Dr. Suite 3300; Houston, TX 77036
A Certified Woman-Owned Business
24x7x365 Customer Support: 832-615-8000 | supp...@pslightwave.com

​This electronic message contains information from PS Lightwave which may be 
privileged and confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of 
individual(s) or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is 
prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please 
notify me by telephone or e-mail immediately.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG  On Behalf Of Mark 
Tinka
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 10:06 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts



On 2/16/21 04:14, Sean Donelan wrote:
>
> Poweroutage.us posted a terrific map, showing the jurisdictional
> borders of the Texas power outages versus the storm related power
> outages elsewhere in the country.
>
> https://twitter.com/PowerOutage_us/status/1361493394070118402
>
>
> Sometimes infrastructure planning failures are not due to "natural
> hazards."

I suppose having some kind of home backup solution wouldn't be too bad right 
now, even though you may still not get access to services. But at least, you 
can brew some coffee, and charge your pulse oximetre.

Mark.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/16/21 04:14, Sean Donelan wrote:


Poweroutage.us posted a terrific map, showing the jurisdictional 
borders of the Texas power outages versus the storm related power 
outages elsewhere in the country.


https://twitter.com/PowerOutage_us/status/1361493394070118402


Sometimes infrastructure planning failures are not due to "natural 
hazards."


I suppose having some kind of home backup solution wouldn't be too bad 
right now, even though you may still not get access to services. But at 
least, you can brew some coffee, and charge your pulse oximetre.


Mark.

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Sean Donelan]

Poweroutage.us posted a terrific map, showing the jurisdictional borders 
of the Texas power outages versus the storm related power outages 
elsewhere in the country.


https://twitter.com/PowerOutage_us/status/1361493394070118402


Sometimes infrastructure planning failures are not due to "natural 
hazards."

Re: Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Eric Kuhnke]

See also, regional maps here. Thanks to CAIDA and the IODA project.

https://ioda.caida.org/ioda/dashboard

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021, 5:54 PM Sean Donelan  wrote:

> Not as bad as Myanmar (14%), Internet connectivity in Texas has been
> declining today.  According to NetBlocks, which normally monitors
> government imposed outages, reports network connectivity at 68% in Texas.
>
> https://netblocks.org/
>
> Texas operates a separate electric grid, with limited interconnections
> to the rest of North America.  For political reasons
>
> For those with long memories, ENRON a Texas based corporation, once upon a
> time drove rolling blackouts across California in order to make billions.
>

Texas internet connectivity declining due to blackouts

[Sean Donelan]

Not as bad as Myanmar (14%), Internet connectivity in Texas has been 
declining today.  According to NetBlocks, which normally monitors 
government imposed outages, reports network connectivity at 68% in Texas.


https://netblocks.org/

Texas operates a separate electric grid, with limited interconnections 
to the rest of North America.  For political reasons


For those with long memories, ENRON a Texas based corporation, once upon a 
time drove rolling blackouts across California in order to make billions.

Re: DoD IP Space

[bzs]

In my humble but correct opinion one of the things which sabotages
these efforts is an aversion to any solution which doesn't feel like
it would work quickly and decisively (ask Bezos to offer a discount to
anyone using IPv6 to order on Amazon???)

I remember back in ~2003 on the Anti-Spam Research Group some
interesting ideas* being shot down because that would take ten years
to deploy! 2003.

And here we are about 25 years into IPv6 still looking for that silver
bullet.

What might be more useful would be forming some sort of group with the
understanding that they might produce a ten year or longer timeline of
steps which might more fully deploy IPv6.

* In all honesty they weren't all that interesting. But for example
"we need to respecify SMTP to stop spam!" had a half-life of about 60
minutes dying on the rebuttal that even if you did that it would take
TEN YEARS to get wide adoption of an SMTP replacement. I never saw how
such proposals would help with spam but ok perhaps they were
discouraged by the rebuts.

-- 
-Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die| b...@theworld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD   | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Matthew Crocker]

They are most likely part of a demand load shedding program and are being paid 
to run off generator.

From: NANOG  on behalf of 
Eric Kuhnke 
Date: Monday, February 15, 2021 at 5:10 PM
To: "nanog@nanog.org list" 
Subject: Infomart Dallas is on generator


I have now heard from two reliable sources that Infomart Dallas is presently on 
generator, and is likely to remain so until the cold weather/electrical supply 
emergency in Texas has abated. No network impact seen yet.

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Eric Kuhnke]

http://www.ercot.com/

The 501c(4) nonprofit entity which controls the Texas grid. They've been
publishing load shedding updates.

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021, 5:07 PM Randy Bush  wrote:

> > From the latest update it sounds like rolling power outages in Dallas as
> > most places in Texas
>
>
> https://www.texastribune.org/2011/02/08/texplainer-why-does-texas-have-its-own-power-grid/
>

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Randy Bush]

> From the latest update it sounds like rolling power outages in Dallas as
> most places in Texas

https://www.texastribune.org/2011/02/08/texplainer-why-does-texas-have-its-own-power-grid/

Re: DoD IP Space

[Randy Bush]

> it’s unclear if there’s been any systematic look-back or institutional
> learning coming out of the entire experience.

i am always impressed by optimism in the face of cold reality

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Kaiser, Erich]

>From the latest update it sounds like rolling power outages in Dallas as
most places in Texas (We have several other sites affected as well) so they
probably figure to just leave everything on generator (All Equinix DCs, not
sure on others) for more stable power.  I just got an update that refueling
trucks coming tomorrow at 10am.


Erich Kaiser
The Fusion Network




On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 4:53 PM Robert DeVita 
wrote:

> Hopefully the other 400mw in Dallas follow their lead.
>
> Robert DeVita
> Founder & CEO
> Mejeticks
> c. 469-441-8864
> e. radev...@mejeticks.com
> --
> *From:* NANOG  on behalf
> of Eric Kuhnke 
> *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2021 4:10:32 PM
> *To:* nanog@nanog.org list 
> *Subject:* Infomart Dallas is on generator
>
> I have now heard from two reliable sources that Infomart Dallas is
> presently on generator, and is likely to remain so until the cold
> weather/electrical supply emergency in Texas has abated. No network impact
> seen yet.
>
>
>

Re: DoD IP Space

[Mark Andrews]

1993 matches my recollections as well.

Network Working Group S. Bradner
Internet draftHarvard University
   A. Mankin
 NRL
  September 1994


 
The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol


  



> On 16 Feb 2021, at 04:28, Mel Beckman  wrote:
> 
> LOL! Well, Mike says “definitely at least 1993”, whereas Wikipedia itself 
> says that Wikipedia cannot be trusted. Mike, to my knowledge, has never 
> admitted being wrong. So I’m going with Mike :)
> 
> I think it was Al Gore who first proposed IPv6, right Mike? :)
> 
>  -mel beckman
> 
>> On Feb 15, 2021, at 6:36 AM, Kenneth J. Dupuis  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 1995? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6
>> 
>> On Feb 11, 2021 8:51 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
>> 
>> On 2/11/21 5:41 PM, Izaac wrote: 
>> > 
>> >> IPv6 restores that ability and RFC-1918 is a bandaid for an obsolete 
>> >> protocol. 
>> > So, in your mind, IPv4 was "obsolete" in 1996 -- almost three years 
>> > before IPv6 was even specified?  Fascinating.  I could be in no way 
>> > mistaken for an IPv4/NAT apologist, but that one's new on me. 
>> 
>> ipv6 was on my radar in the early 90's. it was definitely at least 1993, 
>> maybe earlier. 
>> 
>> Mike 
>> 
>> 

-- 
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742  INTERNET: ma...@isc.org

Re: DoD IP Space

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 9:36 PM Joe Loiacono  wrote:

> V8!  heh ... wow hadn't thought of that for a while ...

... Slaps forehead and says:  "Wow, I could've had a V8!"

Re: Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Robert DeVita]

Hopefully the other 400mw in Dallas follow their lead.

Robert DeVita
Founder & CEO
Mejeticks
c. 469-441-8864
e. radev...@mejeticks.com

From: NANOG  on behalf of Eric 
Kuhnke 
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2021 4:10:32 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org list 
Subject: Infomart Dallas is on generator

I have now heard from two reliable sources that Infomart Dallas is presently on 
generator, and is likely to remain so until the cold weather/electrical supply 
emergency in Texas has abated. No network impact seen yet.

Infomart Dallas is on generator

[Eric Kuhnke]

I have now heard from two reliable sources that Infomart Dallas is
presently on generator, and is likely to remain so until the cold
weather/electrical supply emergency in Texas has abated. No network impact
seen yet.

Re: DoD IP Space

[Joe Loiacono]

V8!  heh ... wow hadn't thought of that for a while ...

On 2/15/2021 3:39 PM, Valdis Klētnieks wrote:

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:51:51 -0800, Sabri Berisha said:


Well, considering this RIPE article that talked about IPv7 already..

https://lists.ripe.net/pipermail/ripe-org-closed/1993/msg00024.html

Bonus points for those who remember/know where v5 and v8 were from :)

Re: DoD IP Space

[Fred Baker]

Streams Transport and PIP.

Good grief. V7 was Robert Ullman’s CATNIP. He wanted to sell hardware to 
everyone, and V7 was the interchange protocol between IPv4, IPX, and CLNS.

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...

> On Feb 15, 2021, at 12:41 PM, Valdis Klētnieks  
> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:51:51 -0800, Sabri Berisha said:
> 
>> Well, considering this RIPE article that talked about IPv7 already..
>> 
>> https://lists.ripe.net/pipermail/ripe-org-closed/1993/msg00024.html
> 
> Bonus points for those who remember/know where v5 and v8 were from :)

V5 was 

Re: DoD IP Space

[james.cut...@consultant.com]

It’s Dead, Jim — Speaking of V8.  I’m glad Outlook had a Delete button.

> On Feb 15, 2021, at 3:39 PM, Valdis Klētnieks  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:51:51 -0800, Sabri Berisha said:
> 
>> Well, considering this RIPE article that talked about IPv7 already..
>> 
>> https://lists.ripe.net/pipermail/ripe-org-closed/1993/msg00024.html
> 
> Bonus points for those who remember/know where v5 and v8 were from :)

Re: DoD IP Space

[Valdis Klētnieks]

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:51:51 -0800, Sabri Berisha said:

> Well, considering this RIPE article that talked about IPv7 already..
>
> https://lists.ripe.net/pipermail/ripe-org-closed/1993/msg00024.html

Bonus points for those who remember/know where v5 and v8 were from :)


pgpdrYkPJgCF0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: DoD IP Space

[Geoff Mulligan]

Actually John - IPng started out being called IPv7, but we caught the 
mistake and renamed it IPv6.  Whew :-)


Geoff


On 2/15/21 8:33 AM, John Curran wrote:
On 15 Feb 2021, at 2:01 AM, Mark Andrews > wrote:

...
Complain to your vendors about not implementing RFC 8305, RFC 6724, and
RFC 7078.  RFC 8305 or RFC6724 + RFC 7078 would fix your issue.

Thats Happy Eyeballs and tuneable address selection rules.


Mark -

You’ve properly pointed out IPv6 can indeed be readily & safely 
deployed today using modern equipment that supports a reasonable 
transition approach… full agreement there.


Interestingly enough, you’ve also pointed out the not-so-secret reason 
why it's taken so long to get sizable deployment of IPv6 – that is, 
despite us knowing that we needed "a straightforward transition plan” 
on day one that documented how to move from IPv4 to IPng (aka IPv6), 
we opted in 1995 to select a next generation protocol which lacked any 
meaningful transition plan and instead left that nasty transition 
topic as an exercise for the reader and/or addressed by postulated 
outputs from newly-defined working groups…  thus the underlying reason 
for the lost decades of creative engineering efforts in gap-filling by 
those who came after and had to actually build working networks and 
applications using IPv6.


For what it’s worth, I do think we’re finally 98 or 99% of the way 
there, but it has resulted some very real costs - rampant industry 
confusion, loss of standards credibility, etc.  There’s some real 
lessons to be had here – as one who was in the IP Directorate at the 
time (and thus sharing in the blame), I know I would have done quite a 
bit differently, but it’s unclear if there’s been any systematic 
look-back or institutional learning coming out of the entire experience.


FYI,
/John

Re: DoD IP Space

[Sabri Berisha]

- On Feb 15, 2021, at 9:28 AM, mel  wrote: 

Hi,

> LOL! Well, Mike says “definitely at least 1993”, whereas Wikipedia itself says
> that Wikipedia cannot be trusted. Mike, to my knowledge, has never admitted
> being wrong. So I’m going with Mike :)

Well, considering this RIPE article that talked about IPv7 already..

https://lists.ripe.net/pipermail/ripe-org-closed/1993/msg00024.html

I'd say: myth plausible.

> I think it was Al Gore who first proposed IPv6, right Mike? :)

Myth busted. He invented the internet. IPv6 was invented by his intern.

Thanks,

Sabri

Re: DoD IP Space

[Mel Beckman]

LOL! Well, Mike says “definitely at least 1993”, whereas Wikipedia itself says 
that Wikipedia cannot be trusted. Mike, to my knowledge, has never admitted 
being wrong. So I’m going with Mike :)

I think it was Al Gore who first proposed IPv6, right Mike? :)

 -mel beckman

On Feb 15, 2021, at 6:36 AM, Kenneth J. Dupuis  wrote:


1995? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6

On Feb 11, 2021 8:51 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:

On 2/11/21 5:41 PM, Izaac wrote:
>
>> IPv6 restores that ability and RFC-1918 is a bandaid for an obsolete 
>> protocol.
> So, in your mind, IPv4 was "obsolete" in 1996 -- almost three years
> before IPv6 was even specified?  Fascinating.  I could be in no way
> mistaken for an IPv4/NAT apologist, but that one's new on me.

ipv6 was on my radar in the early 90's. it was definitely at least 1993,
maybe earlier.

Mike

Register now for our BGP Fundamentals Webinar!

[NANOG News]

*Join us for BGP Fundamentals via NANOG U*
NANOG U Webinars provide students across North America a way to virtually
connect and engage with industry innovators, while learning the latest
Internet technologies + best practices, and accessing career-building tools
+ resources. Our next Webinar will take place on Friday, February 26!

*Date + Time: *
Feb 26, 11am - 1pm PST / 2pm - 4pm EST

*Speaker:*
Aaron Atac, Subspace

*Agenda:*
This webinar will cover the fundamentals of the Border Gateway Protocol
(BGP) as well as service-provider operational insights and challenges not
necessarily highlighted in textbooks.

*Registration: *
NANOG U Webinars are free to attend, but registration is required to
participate. All sessions are conducted at nanog.org. To register for the
webinar, you'll first need to sign up for a NANOG account. It's free,
simple, and takes less than a minute.

Register Now 
Watch Past Webinars 

Re: DoD IP Space

[William Herrin]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 7:49 AM Valdis Klētnieks
 wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 22:25:56 -0800, William Herrin said:
> > This particular problem could be quickly resolved if the OSes still
> > getting updates were updated to default name resolution to prioritize
> > the IPv4 addresses instead. That would allow broken IPv6
> > configurations to exist without breaking the user's entire Internet
> > experience. Which would allow them to leave it turned on so that it
> > resumes working when the error is eventually found and fixed.
>
> Oh, come on Bill.  This ain't your first rodeo.  You know damned well
> that if we do that, the errors are in fact *not* eventually found and fixed.

I don't know that and neither do you. That remains an untested theory.
What I do know, with the perfection of 20/20 hindsight, is that
v6-first has impeded deployment for two decades by routinely giving
folks a reason to turn IPv6 back off.

Hard headed.

Regards,
Bill Herrin




-- 
William Herrin
b...@herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/

Re: DoD IP Space

[Valdis Klētnieks]

On Sun, 14 Feb 2021 22:25:56 -0800, William Herrin said:

> This particular problem could be quickly resolved if the OSes still
> getting updates were updated to default name resolution to prioritize
> the IPv4 addresses instead. That would allow broken IPv6
> configurations to exist without breaking the user's entire Internet
> experience. Which would allow them to leave it turned on so that it
> resumes working when the error is eventually found and fixed.

Oh, come on Bill.  This ain't your first rodeo.  You know damned well
that if we do that, the errors are in fact *not* eventually found and fixed.

In addition, if you do that, even once the error is fixed, the box will
not know about that and will continue to use the IPv4 addresses.

Re: DoD IP Space

[John Curran]

On 15 Feb 2021, at 2:01 AM, Mark Andrews  wrote:
> ...
> Complain to your vendors about not implementing RFC 8305, RFC 6724, and
> RFC 7078.  RFC 8305 or RFC6724 + RFC 7078 would fix your issue.
> 
> Thats Happy Eyeballs and tuneable address selection rules.

Mark - 

You’ve properly pointed out IPv6 can indeed be readily & safely 
deployed today using modern equipment that supports a reasonable transition 
approach… full agreement there. 

Interestingly enough, you’ve also pointed out the not-so-secret reason 
why it's taken so long to get sizable deployment of IPv6 – that is, despite us 
knowing that we needed "a straightforward transition plan” on day one that 
documented how to move from IPv4 to IPng (aka IPv6), we opted in 1995 to select 
a next generation protocol which lacked any meaningful transition plan and 
instead left that nasty transition topic as an exercise for the reader and/or 
addressed by postulated outputs from newly-defined working groups…  thus the 
underlying reason for the lost decades of creative engineering efforts in 
gap-filling by those who came after and had to actually build working networks 
and applications using IPv6.

For what it’s worth, I do think we’re finally 98 or 99% of the way 
there, but it has resulted some very real costs - rampant industry confusion, 
loss of standards credibility, etc.  There’s some real lessons to be had here – 
as one who was in the IP Directorate at the time (and thus sharing in the 
blame), I know I would have done quite a bit differently, but it’s unclear if 
there’s been any systematic look-back or institutional learning coming out of 
the entire experience.

FYI,
/John 

Re: New York Carrier Hotels

[Jared Mauch]

I’m expecting many people to move out to 165 Halsey but as with many things the 
future is still hazy.  I also wonder if at some point Google will decide that 
WFH is viable and they don’t need the office space in 111 8th and things will 
swing back..

(Yes, I know that 165 isn’t in NY)

- Jared

> On Feb 11, 2021, at 1:51 PM, Rod Beck  wrote:
> 
> Hey Folks, 
> 
> I am looking for a list of the ten most important NYC telecom hotels. Over 
> the last 15 years carrier business has shifted to a large extent to Secaucus 
> Equinix & Google has taken over a big part of 111 8th Avenue. What the 
> important sites today and are any new facilities on the horizon?
> 
> Roderick Beck
> Global Network Capacity Procurement
> United Cable Company
> www.unitedcablecompany.com
> https://unitedcablecompany.com/video/
> New York City & Budapest
> rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com
> Budapest: 36-70-605-5144
> NJ: 908-452-8183 

Re: DoD IP Space

[james.cut...@consultant.com]

On Feb 11, 2021, at 9:01 PM, Kenneth J. Dupuis  wrote:
> 
> 1995? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6
> 
> On Feb 11, 2021 8:51 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
> 
> On 2/11/21 5:41 PM, Izaac wrote:
> >
> >> IPv6 restores that ability and RFC-1918 is a bandaid for an obsolete 
> >> protocol.
> > So, in your mind, IPv4 was "obsolete" in 1996 -- almost three years
> > before IPv6 was even specified?  Fascinating.  I could be in no way
> > mistaken for an IPv4/NAT apologist, but that one's new on me.
> 
> ipv6 was on my radar in the early 90's. it was definitely at least 1993, 
> maybe earlier.
> 
> Mike
> 
Back then some thought it would be more like DECnet Phase V.

Netflix Contact

[Cassell, Brandon]

If anyone from Netflix is around, I’d appreciate it if you could hit me up off 
list, we have a ticket open that I could use some assistance on.

Thanks,

Brandon Cassell
bcass...@oar.net

Re: DoD IP Space

[Kenneth J. Dupuis]

1995? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6On Feb 11, 2021 8:51 PM, Michael Thomas  wrote:
On 2/11/21 5:41 PM, Izaac wrote:
>
>> IPv6 restores that ability and RFC-1918 is a bandaid for an obsolete protocol.
> So, in your mind, IPv4 was "obsolete" in 1996 -- almost three years
> before IPv6 was even specified?  Fascinating.  I could be in no way
> mistaken for an IPv4/NAT apologist, but that one's new on me.

ipv6 was on my radar in the early 90's. it was definitely at least 1993, 
maybe earlier.

Mike

Re: New York Carrier Hotels

[Kenneth J. Dupuis]

I don't know about future ones but 32AoA, 60H, etc. are still important.https://www.datacentermap.com/usa/new-york/new-york/I've lived here 44 years so if you need photos, on-the-ground knowledge, etc., let me know off-list. KenOn Feb 11, 2021 1:51 PM, Rod Beck  wrote:

Hey Folks, 





I am looking for a list of the ten most important NYC telecom hotels. Over the last 15 years carrier business has shifted to a large extent to Secaucus Equinix & Google has taken over a big part of 111 8th Avenue. What the important sites today and are any
 new facilities on the horizon?












Roderick Beck
Global Network Capacity Procurement
United Cable Company
www.unitedcablecompany.com

https://unitedcablecompany.com/video/


New York City & Budapest

rod.b...@unitedcablecompany.com
Budapest: 36-70-605-5144
NJ: 908-452-8183 

Re: DoD IP Space

[Mark Tinka]

On 2/15/21 09:59, na...@jack.fr.eu.org wrote:


Yet both ps5 and xbox series x have ipv6 support

A console released in 2013 do not, but its successor released in 2020 
have it


How wild is this, I wonder why ?


IPv6 also runs on hardware that was shipped as far back as 2003, if not 
earlier.


Mark.

Re: DoD IP Space

[William Herrin]

On Sun, Feb 14, 2021 at 11:01 PM Mark Andrews  wrote:
> Complain to your vendors about not implementing RFC 8305, RFC 6724, and
> RFC 7078.  RFC 8305 or RFC6724 + RFC 7078 would fix your issue.
>
> Thats Happy Eyeballs and tuneable address selection rules.
>
> You don’t have to perform the naive connection from getaddrinfo() man page.

Hi Mark,

When I said bull-headed, this is exactly what I had in mind. Happy
eyeballs and things like
https://bill.herrin.us/freebies/libeasyv6-0.1/ aren't first-class
citizens in the APIs. Their code has to be independently added to each
application individually. Getaddrinfo() is core standard. Fix the
problem in the place that fixes it in every place or else it's never
really fixed.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William Herrin
b...@herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/

Re: DoD IP Space

[nanog]

Yet both ps5 and xbox series x have ipv6 support

A console released in 2013 do not, but its successor released in 2020 
have it


How wild is this, I wonder why ?

On 2/15/21 5:25 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
I mean, there's a reason that 
in 2021, PS4 still does not support IPv6.


Mark.