Re: SixXS shutting down 2017-06-06

On 2017-03-23 18:28, David Farmer wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Brian E Carpenter > > wrote > > > One detail not mentioned in the /sunset page. Will you leave the > ULA tool and registry in place

Re: high v6 user-base, less atlas probes

On 2017-01-28 13:51, Bajpai, Vaibhav wrote: > Hello, > > Here is a list of top 20 countries that have a large v6 user-base [*] but are > underrepresented by RIPE Atlas due to less number of deployed dual-stacked > probes. Consider hosting a dual-stacked probe in these regions to help remove > the

Re: macos Sierra with CGA address?

On 2016-12-14 13:26, Jeroen Massar wrote: > On 2016-12-14 13:10, Jeroen Massar wrote: >> [..] >>> Actually, it is not a stable address as some have found out (read: >>> anecdotal), they also change at re-install and there are a couple of >>> other possibilitie

Re: macos Sierra with CGA address?

On 2016-12-14 13:10, Jeroen Massar wrote: > [..] >> Actually, it is not a stable address as some have found out (read: >> anecdotal), they also change at re-install and there are a couple of >> other possibilities from what I recall. > > From xnu-3248.60.10/bsd/netinet6

Re: macos Sierra with CGA address?

On 2016-12-14 12:40, Jeroen Massar wrote: [..] >> There is another sysctl parameter (opmode) but unclear what 1 (or 0) means: >> $ sysctl net.inet6.send >> net.inet6.send.opstate: 1 >> net.inet6.send.opmode: 1 > > There is no documentation at all about these things

Re: macos Sierra with CGA address?

On 2016-12-14 12:25, Holger Zuleger wrote: > Hi Jeroen, > >>> I found two or three posts in the internet, all mentioning (or hoping) >>> that this is related to a change to RFC7217 as default IID mechanism. >>> >>> But one guy sad, that the source code (of 10.11) shows, that this is a >>>

Re: macos Sierra with CGA address?

On 2016-12-14 11:55, Holger Zuleger wrote: > Hi, > > I just realized that the permanent interface identifier of my MAC has > changed after upgrading to OS 10.12 (I guess). > > The output of ifconfig shows a new "secured" flag at the permanent address. > $ ifconfig en0 | grep inet6 | \ >>

Re: Linux and ULA support and default route

On 2016-10-13 09:36, Tore Anderson wrote: > * Jeroen Massar <jer...@massar.ch> > >> RA's only install the /64 and when default announced a default. >> >> Thus 'the rest of the ULA /48' would require a default route to be >> installed to reach that... &g

Re: Linux and ULA support and default route

On 2016-10-13 02:30, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Hi Jeroen, > On 13/10/2016 12:16, Jeroen Massar wrote: >> On 2016-10-13 00:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> [..] >>> Kernel IPv6 routing table >>> DestinationNext Hop Fl

Re: Linux and ULA support and default route

On 2016-10-13 02:05, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter > > wrote: > > ::/0 :: !n -1 > 1 137 lo > > > I think !n means network

Re: Linux and ULA support and default route

On 2016-10-13 00:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote: [..] > Kernel IPv6 routing table > DestinationNext Hop Flag Met Ref Use If > fd00::/64 fe80::be05:43ff:fe8e:ce39 UG 600 112 > wlp2s0 > fe80::/64 ::

Re: SV: CPE Residential IPv6 Security Poll

On 2016-09-21 13:49, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: [..] > There's a fairly large SIP operator (sipgate) here in Germany who for > quite some time has told people that their service not working over > DS-Lite was entirely a problem between the customer and their ISP, > giving technical reasons you

Re: pxe boot for ipv6 only machine not working on vmware

On 2016-07-01 13:41, Benedikt Stockebrand wrote: > Hi Shilpa, > > "S, Shilpashree 1. (Nokia - IN/Bangalore)" > writes: > >> We have a case to install machine with ipv6 only using pxe boot. > > bad news for you: PXE as per the Intel specs is IPv4 only. Intel wants >

Re: v6 naming and shaming - *.europa.eu

On 2016-05-18 16:10, Phil Mayers wrote: > On 18/05/16 15:03, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >> The best advice for getting IPv6 fixed is for a large well used network >> (google, facebook) to stop providing IPv4. Then suddenly people will fix >> things as they won'

Re: v6 naming and shaming - *.europa.eu

On 2016-05-18 15:52, Phil Mayers wrote: > On 18/05/16 14:29, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >> Really, you cannot keep on telling people to finally deploy IPv6, it >> does not have any effect whatsoever, only their pocket books care and >> those will only notice when it is

Re: v6 naming and shaming - *.europa.eu

On 2016-05-18 15:23, Phil Mayers wrote: > Broken over IPv6: > > https://webcast.ec.europa.eu/281715cafa675bf359ebaa42cb44fa17 > > (Webserver has , returns 404 over v6, fine over v4) > > And yet: > > https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/blog/ipv6-more-than-a-reality-a-necessity >

Re: push apps failing in Android until you disable IPv6

On 2016-05-09 19:28, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Tore Anderson > wrote: > > Even a ULA PIO could be problematic if Android's source > address selection algorithm isn't updated to RFC6724 defaults. RFC3484 > predates ULAs,

Re: push apps failing in Android until you disable IPv6

[yep, this is an off-topic comment, but partially it isn't as it does affect deployability of IPv6 on a device that was build even as shortly as a year ago...] On 2016-05-01 03:20, Erik Kline wrote: > A bug report, especially from a Marshmallow (or even N Developer > Preview) device could be

Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

On 2016-04-27 09:59, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >> specifically a 'router' but a CPE (that for IPv4 NATs and for IPv6 sorta > > Let me just say that when I used "CPE" in a document, I was reminded by > BBF (BroadBand F

Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

On 2016-04-26 10:52, Thomas Schäfer wrote: > @Jeroen > Thanks for the definition of router and cpe. > > > But the chain of problems must be long: > > dead DNS-resolvers by isp > > dead DNS-resolvers not recognized by the "cpe" as a cache resolver Dead-detection is a standard thing. Only

Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

On 2016-04-26 10:09, Thomas Schäfer wrote: > Am 25.04.2016 um 17:40 schrieb Eric Vyncke (evyncke): >> Thanks to all people pointing me towards a DNS issue. >> > > I read this thread with great interest. I have a Marshmallow dualstacked > via Wifi (and via mobile), and I have no issues so far. >

Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

On 2016-04-24 16:17, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: > Jeroen, Erik and John, > > Thanks for the hint. I will advise the ISP to investigate any DNS issue > (such as not returning an error message when requesting a non-existing > ) but I wonder why it is linked to that specific Android

Re: Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

On 2016-04-24 11:51, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) wrote: > One of the first Belgian ISP to deploy IPv6 (VOO) is now recommending to > its Android Marshmallow (6.0.1) users to deactivate IPv6 on their > residential WiFi CPE... :-( > > It appears that the issue is about IPv6 web sites/apps being really >

Re: Ubuntu 16.04

On 2016-04-22 14:37, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Jeroen Massar wrote: > >> Isn't it awesome that Ubuntu wants dynamic addresses on servers? :) > > Well, this wasn't a server, this is installed as a desktop. Then you should expect all kinds of magic...

Re: Ubuntu 16.04

On 2016-04-22 13:39, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > > Hi, > > I have a pretty standard Ubuntu 14.04 machine I just upgraded to 16.04, > which means I get a "4.4.0-21-generic" kernel. > > I guess I'm using straight up network manager, because my > /etc/network/interfaces doesn't mention anything

Re: IPv6 Dynamic Prefix Problems

On 2015-12-16 10:40, Jens Link wrote: > Johannes Weber writes: [..] > 5) Use a SIXXS / HE Tunnel Tunnel brokers (RFC3053) are transition technologies, they won't be here forever. You likely wanted to point out commercial VPN solutions that can provide these services just

Re: New operational tool

On 2014-12-16 20:54, Bjørn Mork wrote: Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com writes: http://gabrielmartin.net/projects/hipku/ Something's wrong here bjorn@canardo:~$ dig gabrielmartin.net Yeah, always silly folks who still don't have on their sites... Seem it uses

Re: IPv6-only residential service (MAP, lw4o6)

On 2014-12-06 17:45, Daniel Roesen wrote: On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 08:08:26PM +0900, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: It won't be easy to prove that DS-Lite is not being deployed, because there are some fairly large deployments in Germany (Kabel Deutschland and Unitymedia, both owned by Liberty Global).

Re: IPv6-only residential service (MAP, lw4o6)

On 2014-12-05 14:30, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: Hello all, I'm wondering, have people deployed IPv6-only residential services? I know of a couple of DS-lite implementations, but we'd be more interested to hear about network operators deploying either MAP or lightweight 4over6 (not just

Who is stilll running 6to4 relays (Was: I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-08.txt)

BCC'ing ipv6-ops@lists.cluenet.de thus a bit of background info: draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic-08.txt currently contains: Section 4 Deprecation 8 Current operators of an anycast 6to4 relay with the IPv4 address 192.88.99.1 SHOULD review the information in

Re: Teredo sunset - did it happen?

On 2014-11-17 17:38, Phil Mayers wrote: On 17/11/2014 16:23, Jeroen Massar wrote: What are you trying to achieve by blocking that port? I honestly don't know why you want to talk about other things, but I've no interest in discussing them with you. Then don't make statements that you

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai

On 2014-11-11 16:00, Emanuel Popa wrote: Hi, Is there anyway to intentionally and immediately get on Google's DNS blacklist in order to avoid similar outages in the future affecting only IPv6 traffic? http://www.google.com/intl/en_ALL/ipv6/statistics/data/no_.txt Or maybe the smart

How to unsubscribe (Was: Opt Out (UNCLASSIFIED))

On 2014-11-11 17:25, Deal, Victor T MSG RET wrote: UNCLASSIFIED How do I opt out of this list? By looking at the standardized List headers which show: List-Unsubscribe: http://lists.cluenet.de/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-ops, mailto:ipv6-ops-requ...@lists.cluenet.de?subject=unsubscribe

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai

On 2014-11-11 19:09, Andras Toth wrote: On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 3:36 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch mailto:jer...@massar.ch wrote: If you expect that they have outages that they cannot quickly see or not, then you should also expect a blacklist like to be broken

Fwd: [v6ops] IPv6 MTU Flow-label.... (related to draft-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-01)

MTU Flow-label (related to draft-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-01) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 11:31:52 +0100 From: Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch Organization: Massar To: i...@ietf.org, v6...@ietf.org Hola folks (and folks in BCC ;), With the recent Google and Akamai outages (latter still ongoing afaik

Re: RING measurements don't match access-networks (Was: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks...)

On 2014-11-10 11:48, Job Snijders wrote: On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 08:46:50AM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote: Some hosts are behind exotic 6to4 NATted tunnels, I am a bit surprised by such a statement, or the need for it Because that's what it looks like? I don't know what else i'd call

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai

On 2014-11-09 10:42, Daniel Austin wrote: Hi, I've been having terrible connectivity to Google via IPv6 the last few days (i'd even resorted to using Bing!), but can confirm it is working fine for me today. It indeed is looking fine now for the Google problem. Now for Akamai to use their

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai (Was: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google)

On 2014-11-09 12:00, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar On 2014-11-08 18:38, Tore Anderson wrote: Yannis: «We're enabling IPv6 on our CPEs» Jeroen: «And then getting broken connectivity to Google» I'm not a native speaker of English, but I struggle to understand it any other way than

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai

On 2014-11-09 22:10, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 11:48 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch mailto:jer...@massar.ch wrote: The issue with IPv6 access to Google should now be resolved. Please let us know if you're still having problems. The fun question

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai (Was: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google)

On 2014-11-09 21:27, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar Testing from colod boxes on well behaved networks (otherwise they would not know or be part of the RING), while the problem lies with actual home users is quite a difference. So far you've been claiming that the problem lies

Re: Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai (Was: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google)

On 2014-11-09 22:10, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar Also note that the Akamai problem (which still persists) is a random one. Hence fetching one URL is just a pure luck thing if it works or not. As a generic page has multiple objects though, you'll hit it much quicker. Hm. As I've

Re: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google

On 2014-11-08 16:16, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar On 2014-11-08 11:34, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar On 2014-11-08 10:27, Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: [..] the short story here is that we're (finally) enabling IPv6 on our (already capable) CPEs :) And then getting broken

Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai (Was: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google)

On 2014-11-08 18:38, Tore Anderson wrote: * Jeroen Massar The only link: they are all using IPv6. You are trying to make this OTE link. I have never stated anything like that. Though, you likely take that from the fact that the reply followed in that thread. Yannis: «We're enabling IPv6

Re: 6to4 in Internet aaaa records

On 2014-10-04 12:56, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 12:49:00PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote: On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 10:31:25PM -0400, Jeroen Massar wrote: http://www.azdes.gov)... 2002::cf6c:8846 That is an invalid 6to4 address as it would have a 6to4 gateway of 0.0.0.0

Re: 6to4 in Internet aaaa records

On 2014-10-02 22:24, Ca By wrote: Folks, What is the general impression of 6to4 addresses in records? I recently had a customer complain about this situation, and i am not sure, as a service provider, how to deal with it. From my home comcast connection with real full dual-stack, i

Re: Something with filters

and technical contacts too. Vendors just do not see what the problem is it seems... On 2014-08-28 07:46, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch mailto:jer...@massar.ch wrote: 9 2001:5a0:a00::2e (2001:5a0:a00::2e) 79.018 ms 79.910 ms

Something with filters

I was doing some traceroutes to determine some weird claim of a transit (not shown in the below trace) being tier1 while another transit actually popped up in their network and then noticed this beauty: 9 2001:5a0:a00::2e (2001:5a0:a00::2e) 79.018 ms 79.910 ms 79.960 ms 10 :: (::) 101.893

Re: Something with filters

On 2014-08-27 19:52, Jared Mauch wrote: On Aug 27, 2014, at 12:01 PM, Jeroen Massar jer...@massar.ch wrote: I was doing some traceroutes to determine some weird claim of a transit (not shown in the below trace) being tier1 while another transit actually popped up in their network

Re: IPv6-related (?) Bind issue

On 2014-03-06 10:00 , Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: [..] https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/2014-March/092706.html https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/2014-March/011385.html And asking on yet-another list, did you do the /64 change:

Re: IPv6-related (?) Bind issue

On 2014-03-06 10:53 , Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: On 03/06/2014 11:07 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote: On 2014-03-06 10:00 , Yannis Nikolopoulos wrote: [..] https://lists.isc.org/pipermail/bind-users/2014-March/092706.html https://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/dns-operations/2014-March/011385.html

Re: Reaching google.com using Chrome

On 2014-01-13 19:02 , Sammer Mati wrote: [..] We ran wireshark and found out that the IPv6 address is different for Google.com when using IE or Chrome! I haven't tested yet with Windows7 That is just pure DNS selection luck... Note that a lot of properties on this massive Internet are using

Re: IPv6 broken on Fedora 20?

On 2013-12-19 17:09 , Simon Perreault wrote: Is there any other Fedora user on this list that could confirm this? I filed a bug here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1045118 net.ipv6.conf.em1.accept_ra = 0 How do you expect that to work? Change to either 1 or 2 (in case you

How to unsubscribe from ipv6-ops (Was: IPv6 broken on Fedora 20?)

On 2013-12-19 17:30 , McKnight, Joe wrote: Hi, I ended up on this listserve by mistake. Will someone please remove me? If you don't know how to unsubscribe from mailinglists you indeed do not belong here. From the email-headers: List-Id: IPv6 operators forum ipv6-ops.lists.cluenet.de

Re: Microsoft: Give Xbox One users IPv6 connectivity

On 2013-10-10 00:02, Christopher Palmer wrote: John and Lorenzo beat me to it J. Example: Samantha has native IPv6 and Teredo. Albert has Teredo only. But what do you do with the more and more common case[1] where one gets native IPv6 and IPv4-over-DSlite; especially considering

Re: IPV6 Minimom alocation for recidential customers

On 2013-08-20 16:33 , Arturo Servin wrote: I wouldn't say that it is dependent in the RIR, it is about an ISP decision, not about a regional organization. (note, I work for one). Working for a RIR just means that you are implementing the rules that are set by that RIRs membership. Thus

Re: IPV6 Minimom alocation for recidential customers

On 8/20/13 11:36 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote: It may be some bias from some organizations or individuals in those regions, but at the end the decision of using /64, /60, /56 or /48 depends on the ISP alone. As prefixes are allocated based on the amount of address space one needs, the ISP receives

Re: l.yimg.com (Yahoo!) over IPv6

On 2013-08-19 23:10 , Phil Pennock wrote: On 2013-08-19 at 15:10 -0500, Frank Bulk wrote: It works for me, too. Can you replicate this issue on other machines and vantage points? I did, last week when I first saw it, to initially confirm it wasn't my home connection; at which point, I

Re: Linux IPv6 routing strange behaviour

On 2013-08-15 13:26, Phil Mayers wrote: On 15/08/13 12:14, Pim van Pelt wrote: Just ad a datapoint to Max' last remark, at sixxs we moved away from kernel based routing by implementing ipv6 routing in userspace (taking tap input and raw socket output) largely because of neighbor cache

Re: Linux IPv6 routing strange behaviour

On 2013-08-15 14:41, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Thu, 15 Aug 2013, Jeroen Massar wrote: Yes, that is 5 /40s worth of address space and everything is piped into the sixxs interface to a single neighbor that lives on the tapped interface. We thus indeed hit the Linux routing logic a bit

Re: Linux IPv6 routing strange behaviour

On 2013-08-14 12:58 , Max Tulyev wrote: On 14.08.13 13:39, Jeroen Massar wrote: I see the strange behaviour of my Linux routers. There are quagga and bird with IPv6 BGP full view. On the same box? Are they using the same routing table? I am fairly confident that will end up in a fight

Re: teredo.ipv6.microsoft.com off?

On 2013-07-17 15:09 , Ron Broersma wrote: On Jul 16, 2013, at 10:40 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, Christopher Palmer wrote: If there is feedback on the ongoing experiment or our consideration of sunsetting Teredo, do let me know. So far people have been quite

Re: Linux 3.9 routing oddity

On 2013-07-02 21:27, Pierre Emeriaud wrote: [..] $ ip -6 nei show fe80::f6ca:e5ff:fe43:d114 dev eth0 lladdr f4:ca:e5:43:d1:14 router REACHABLE The neighbor tables are caches, thus indeed, until they are used they won't appear there. $ ip -6 route get 2001:db8:400c:c03::be

Re: Point-to-point /64

On 2013-06-01 13:38, Arturo Servin wrote: Ole, I know! Basically I want to have the whole picture before recommend or not recommend to use /64s in p2p links (or use them myself) /64s in p2p looks very appealing for many reasons, but they have a counter argument in

Re: Point-to-point /64

On 2013-06-01 15:03, Ole Troan wrote: [..] As the subject was about 'security', more in the rule of DoS/DDoS, the problem becomes that some miscreants target exactly those addresses because they are expected to not forward much Indeed for normal operation it should be okay, but miscreants

6PE mapped addresses used for ICMPv6 responses - knob to fix that?

In relation to the fd00::/8 thread, it seems the bug with respect to 6PE is not resolved yet. That is, if you have 6PE (IPv4 LSP) in your network routers might send an ICMPv6 message from the IPv6-Mapped-IPv4 address. And as ::::0.0.0.0/96 should not be in anybody's BGP table, it will fail

Re: http://www.6assist.net/ - call for test

On 2013-05-10 11:17, Max Tulyev wrote: Hi All, We are developping a new kind of IPv6 tunnel broker. The main idea is let the traffic flow directly between peers, not through the tunnel broker server. The website of that project is http://www.6assist.net/ It acts like a virtual media