This 100-line document contains 62% of what you need to know to avoid annoying
10,000 people in your email to the NANOG list. It also containers pointers
to another 23%. Please take 5 minutes to read it before you post [again].
General Information
===
About NANOG:
Owen DeLong wrote:
As of June, 2008, at least, AfriNIC was not using a distinct range for
these.
There was discussion of converting to this due to these problems.
afrinic /48 are out of 2001:43f8::/29
http://www.afrinic.net/Registration/resources.htm
grep -w ipv6 delegated-afrinic-20081118
Nathan Ward wrote:
I'd prefer to
make my routers respond from loopback or something.
Wouldnt we all...how is that done again?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there any parties out there routing /48 IPv6 networks globally? I ran
into a supposed Catch-22 with Verizon and IPv6 address space and was
looking for clarification.
Let them signup to GRH (http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/) then it will be
very easy to see which
Having a mail issue looking for hotmail contact.
Thanks,
Jason
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Michael Sinatra
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/18/08 9:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Nathan Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish them good luck in reaching the DNS root servers.
They are in critical infrastructure
Christopher Morrow wrote:
if you want v6 adoption... latency, path length, jitter, performance
all should closely match v4 specs. Expecting a US customer to be 'ok'
with 300ms to reach a US site 30 miles (as the crow flies) via
Germany... not good.
V6 so far doesn't have the same $$ and
In a message written on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:26:36PM -0500, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
traceroute6 to the ISC's v6 allocation(s) for f-root ... (from inside
701) oh, not working...
traceroute6 to ipv6.google.com from inside 701, oh... not working either.
vzb's v6 table is far from
Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 11/18/08 9:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Nathan Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish them good luck in reaching the DNS root servers.
They are in critical infrastructure space, which is a single /32
with
traceroute6 to the
Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:26:36PM -0500, Christopher
Morrow wrote:
traceroute6 to the ISC's v6 allocation(s) for f-root ... (from inside
701) oh, not working...
traceroute6 to ipv6.google.com from inside 701, oh... not working either.
vzb's v6
Try out the GUI thing.
I know people will go GUIs are for idiots! and all that.
Agree, the SAM is excellent, esp the XML interface to it.
Regards,
Neil.
--
Neil J. McRae -- Alive and Kicking.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not long ago, ARIN changed the IPv6 policy so that
residential subscribers could be issued with a /56
instead of the normal /48 assignment. This was done
so that ISPs
On 19/11/2008, at 4:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Nathan Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish them good luck in reaching the DNS root servers.
They are in critical infrastructure space, which is a single /32
with
traceroute6 to the ISC's v6
On 11/18/2008 at 11:03 AM, Tim Durack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not long ago, ARIN changed the IPv6 policy so that
residential subscribers could be issued with a /56
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Crist Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On 11/18/2008 at 11:03 AM, Tim Durack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not long ago, ARIN changed
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote:
traceroute6 to the ISC's v6 allocation(s) for f-root ... (from inside
701) oh, not working...
traceroute6 to ipv6.google.com from inside 701, oh... not working either.
vzb's v6 table is far from complete :( which is pretty painful.
That's not
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Christopher Morrow
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Nathan Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish them good luck in reaching the DNS root servers.
They are in critical infrastructure space, which is a single /32 with
traceroute6
Having no route is not a problem, you should get a destination
unreachable directly and all is fine because IPv4 should be used as a
fallback.
The big problem is when you have a route to them, but they don't have a
route back. You don't get destination unreachables, but instead get
You too, huh?
On Tue, 2008-11-18 at 10:05 -1000, Antonio Querubin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Christopher Morrow wrote:
traceroute6 to the ISC's v6 allocation(s) for f-root ... (from inside
701) oh, not working...
traceroute6 to ipv6.google.com from inside 701, oh... not working either.
Christopher Morrow wrote:
GRH is too slow to get me an answer on what it thinks the v6 table
size should be :( Geoff says though:
1627 routes
(http://bgp.potaroo.net/v6/as2.0/index.html)
route-views6 is another good place to look. 1481 is the max
seen there. Perhaps there are some
On 11/18/08 9:59 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Michael Sinatra wrote:
On 11/18/08 9:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Nathan Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish them good luck in reaching the DNS root servers.
They are in critical infrastructure space, which
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Paul Timmins wrote:
You too, huh?
Is your IPv6 tunnel with vzb using GRE or 6-in-4 encapsulation?
Antonio Querubin
whois: AQ7-ARIN
GRE.
The problem we have (I think) is that the tunnel goes to something other
than the direct router we have the DS3 on.
The tunnel goes:
vzb-ds3 router-ethernet-another router
We aren't able to do more than a 1500 byte MTU, so when they send
packets larger than 1380 or so, the packets never
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008, Jeroen Massar wrote:
Check: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html for a list of
suggested filter expressions that cover all of these correctly.
Unfortunately, the JunOS version of the strict filter is blocking
/32's from APNIC region as well. The offending
24 matches
Mail list logo
