Re: A crazy idea

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

Thank you, Tim.

I have often suggested that clear business purposes should drive implementation 
of technology. Every cogent analysis of IPv6 shows that there are enough 
addresses that we need not worry about running out of addresses for many 
decades. Even swarms of devices should not seriously impact global IPv6 usage 
as they will have their own collision domain (/64, I presume). Norbert Weiner’s 
book Science and Cyphernetics (The Human Use of Human Beings) suggests than one 
should optimize human productivity and let the technology handle the grunt 
work. The human cost of micro-managing IPv6 assignments would be obscenely 
prohibitive. 

In well over 15 years on this topic, I have yet to find a reason for making 
every customer encounter and configuration more complicated than as described 
by Tim. It just does not make economic sense.
-
James R. Cutler 
Top posted because Apple keeps changing Mail and I am Lazy an engineer at heart.
james.cut...@consultant.com 

> On Jul 19, 2021, at 11:12 AM, t...@pelican.org wrote:
> 
> On Monday, 19 July, 2021 14:04, "Stephen Satchell"  said:
> 
>> The allocation of IPv6 space with prefixes shorter than /64 is indeed a
>> consideration for bigger administrative domains like country
>> governments, but on the other end, SOHO customers would be happy with
>> /96, /104 or even /112 allocations if they could get them.  (Just how
>> many light bulbs, fridges, toasters, doorbells, phones,  does SOHOs
>> have?)  I would *not* like to see "us" make the same mistake with IPv6
>> that was made with IPv4, handing out large blocks of space like so many
>> pieces of M or Skittles candy.
> 
> Nay, nay, and thrice nay.  Don't think in terms of addresses for IPv6, think 
> in terms of subnets.  I can't stress this enough, it's the big v4 to v6 
> paradigm shift - don't think about "how many hosts on this net", think about 
> "how many nets".
> 
> It's potentially useful for SOHO users to have multiple subnets, particularly 
> as they stick multiple devices in their home network that try to do PD from 
> the upstream for each downstream function.  /56 for every SOHO is a 
> fire-and-forget, you don't have to dick about with right-sizing anything, you 
> don't have to evaluate requirements with the customer, you don't have to do 
> all kinds of management system stuff to track who has what size, and it gives 
> you some room for a couple of levels of hierarchy within the house.
> 
> Make all of the subnets /64s, and SLAAC etc Just Work too.
> 
> Wikipedia suggests a little short of 200M households in the US.  That's 28 
> bits of space to give a /56 to every household.  Let's assume ISPs are really 
> bad at aggregation, so those bits are spread across multiple PoPs, multiple 
> ISPs, etc, and we take 36 bits of space to actually allocate those.  (That's 
> only in /56 in every 256 used, *lots* of room for sparse PoPs, sparse ISPs, 
> etc).  Shift back 36 bits from a /56, we've used a /20 to number the entire 
> US.
> 
> Same again for India.  3 of those for China.  It's all smaller from there for 
> the rest of the world.  Maybe 100 or so /20s to number the entire world on 
> the same plan.  There are a million /20s in the IPv6 address space.
> 
> We've got room to be sensible about assignments without repeating the IPv4 
> scarcity problem.
> 
> Cheers,
> Tim.
> 
> 

Opt-in national WEA test in the United States on Aug 11 at 2:20pm EDT

[Sean Donelan]

Tommorrow, Wednesday, August 11, 2021 at 2:20 p.m. EDT the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will be testing the national emergency 
alert system and wireless emergency alert system.


Most of the news reporting has tried to simplify things.

The Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) test on mobile devices is "opt-in."

By default, consumer devices are NOT enabled for WEA tests.  A consumer 
must manually enable test messages.  Other emergency alerts are enabled by 
default.


Instructions to enable/disable WEA test messages on iPhone and Android
https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/weatest_opt-in_instructions.pdf

Additionally, only mobile devices with

1. WEA version 2.0 or later (roughly iPhone 6 and later)
2. Use a participating wireless service provider, the six major cellular 
carriers covering 97% of subscribers participate in WEA
3. In range, and receiving a radio signal from a participating carrier 
cell tower (not in a cave, basement, outback -- no signal)

4. Powered on, and not in airplane mode


You can provide feedback, if you opted-in, about how well the test worked.

FEMA-National-Test [@] fema.dhs.gov

https://www.fema.gov/fact-sheet/frequently-asked-questions-2021-ipaws-national-test

Re: Does anybody here have a problem

[Mike Hammett]

Are you referring to mailing lists that lack some kind of added prefix to the 
subject? 




- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

- Original Message -

From: "C. A. Fillekes"  
To: "NANOG mailing list"  
Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 6:43:50 PM 
Subject: Does anybody here have a problem 





telling the difference between their NANOG and SCA mail? 


since I stopped getting both in digest form, maybe it's easier to mix the two 
up by mistake. 

Re: Does anybody here have a problem

[joe hess]

There used to be (1990’s) a bunch of guys that were Interop volunteers, but 
they also owned the Renaissance Fair in Novato, Ca.  The company name on the 
fair program as its owner was “The Society for Creative Anachronism.”   I know 
there used to be a fair amount of overlap between the NANOG group and the Fair 
people.

> On Aug 10, 2021, at 8:24 AM, Matthew Petach  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 12:20 AM Robert Brockway  > wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, C. A. Fillekes wrote:
> 
> > telling the difference between their NANOG and SCA mail?
> 
> Can't say that I do.  I've been on NANOG for about 17 years.  I used to be 
> subscribed to over 100 technical lists.  Despite these two facts I have no 
> idea what you mean by SCA in this context.
> 
> I keep reading it as "Society for Creative Anachronism".
> 
> Would anyone care to enlighten me about this SCA list?  My Googlefu has 
> failed me.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Rob
> 
> 
> Hi Rob,
> 
> SCA is the "Society for Creative Announcements", which is all about 
> how to creatively announce your BGP prefixes in ways that get around 
> filters, prefix limits, congested peering links, Backdoor Santa specials, 
> and other such hindrances to the free flow of packets in the directions 
> you really want them to go.
> 
> I can completely understand how the original poster could have 
> gotten the two lists mixed up.  Some days, I can hardly tell them 
> apart myself.
> 
> Matt
> 
> PS--for the humour-impaired, here is your requisite wink:  ;)
>   

Re: Does anybody here have a problem

[Matthew Petach]

On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 12:20 AM Robert Brockway 
wrote:

> On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, C. A. Fillekes wrote:
>
> > telling the difference between their NANOG and SCA mail?
>
> Can't say that I do.  I've been on NANOG for about 17 years.  I used to be
> subscribed to over 100 technical lists.  Despite these two facts I have no
> idea what you mean by SCA in this context.
>
> I keep reading it as "Society for Creative Anachronism".
>
> Would anyone care to enlighten me about this SCA list?  My Googlefu has
> failed me.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rob
>
>
Hi Rob,

SCA is the "Society for Creative Announcements", which is all about
how to creatively announce your BGP prefixes in ways that get around
filters, prefix limits, congested peering links, Backdoor Santa specials,
and other such hindrances to the free flow of packets in the directions
you really want them to go.

I can completely understand how the original poster could have
gotten the two lists mixed up.  Some days, I can hardly tell them
apart myself.

Matt

PS--for the humour-impaired, here is your requisite wink:  ;)

Re: "Tactical" /24 announcements

[Mark Tinka]

On 8/9/21 19:38, Tom Beecher wrote:

Folks can announce longer than 24 masks all day. They're unlikely to 
propagate very far though, since most won't accept longer than 24 from 
the world at large.


Been waiting for the day when /27's, /28's and /29's are going to make 
it into the DFZ, as was promised 5 or more years ago :-).


Mark.

Re: "Tactical" /24 announcements

[Masataka Ohta]

Sabri Berisha wrote:


Just for fun, I did the math. A total of 16,777,216 /24s fit in 32
bits. Take away all the reserved space as per IANA (this is 1,266,696
/24s, see below),


> 240.0.0.0/41048576

I think we should also take away multicast addresses of

> 224.0.0.0/41048576

because multicast route can not be aggregated and must
be treated as /32.

Anyway,


The largest FIB table I have seen (hi Jim!) was 3,563,546 routes in
hardware. This was in a lab environment, of course.


for /24, these days, having 16M entry SRAM (simple one, not
TCAM) is trivially easy.

Masataka Ohta

Re: Does anybody here have a problem

[Robert Brockway]

On Mon, 9 Aug 2021, C. A. Fillekes wrote:


telling the difference between their NANOG and SCA mail?


Can't say that I do.  I've been on NANOG for about 17 years.  I used to be 
subscribed to over 100 technical lists.  Despite these two facts I have no 
idea what you mean by SCA in this context.


I keep reading it as "Society for Creative Anachronism".

Would anyone care to enlighten me about this SCA list?  My Googlefu has 
failed me.


Cheers,

Rob

Re: "Tactical" /24 announcements

[Lukas Tribus]

On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 17:47, Billy Croan  wrote:
> Are there any big networks that drop or penalize announcements like this?

It's possible you could get your peering request denied for this. I
have put *reasonable* prefix aggregation into peering requirements for
some years now. If you are a small eyeball network with 8192 IP
addresses and originate 32 /24's, that is *not* reasonable.



On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 17:47, Billy Croan  wrote:
> to originate everything as distinct /24 prefixes, to reduce the effect of
> a potential bgp hijack.

Some men just want to see the world burn.


lukas