Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

2010-07-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Well said. One more reason is transition mechanisms. For example, 6to4, TBs, manual tunnels, those are just a few examples, which use/provide /48. We have today many customers using /48, which have already their own internal addressing plans, or manual subnets configured internally. Are you

Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

2010-07-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
And then next you can say ok, so /32 bits is big enough for your home, so let's change it again, kill autoconfiguration, ask existing IPv6 users to redo their addressing plans, renumber, etc., and use all the rest of the bits for routing ? And so on, of course, where is the limit ? You should

Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course

2010-07-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
exercise for our IPv6 course JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: And then next you can say ok, so /32 bits is big enough for your home, so let's change it again, kill autoconfiguration, ask existing IPv6 users to redo their addressing plans, renumber, etc., and use all the rest of the bits for routing

Re: IPv6 Routing table will be bloated?

2010-10-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Totally agree. In IPv6, polices are in some RIRs and MUST be in all them, balancing conservation and aggregation, but in case of conflict aggregation is the top priority. I can read it at the NRPM: 6.3.8. Conflict of goals The goals described above will often conflict with each other, or with

Re: Real World NAT64 deployments

2011-03-03 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
6in4 is IPv6 encapsulated in IPv4 = protocol 41, typically used in manual tunnelling configuration and also in tunnel brokers and some other type of tunnels. 6to4 is an automatic transition mechanism that uses 6in4 to automatically create IPv6 tunnels using a special IPv6 prefix 2002::/16,

Re: Real World NAT64 deployments

2011-03-04 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Mar 2011 18:19:27 +0900 Para: Jordi Palet Martinez jordi.pa...@consulintel.es CC: nanog@nanog.org Asunto: Re: Real World NAT64 deployments 6to4 is an automatic transition mechanism ^ non- which allows an end site to have horrible v6 pseudo-connectivity over a provider who

Re: Quad-A records in Network Solutions ?

2012-03-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
And they need to do anyway, if they want to keep the contract: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=news/newsroomid=8494 Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: Jeff Fisher na...@techmonkeys.org Responder a: na...@techmonkeys.org Fecha: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 11:53:35 -0600 Para:

Re: ipv6 book recommendations?

2012-06-06 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
One more (free) book: http://www.ipv6tf.org/index.php?page=news/newsroomid=8281 (available in several languages) ** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains

Re: IPv6 End User Fee

2012-08-03 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Add value. You must not charge for the addresses at all, they are not yours, you can't sell them. In every smart business, the future is not anymore selling goods but added value. If you have a quasi-unlimited number of addresses in every customer, you can star building up new value added

Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

2007-05-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
I need to insist on this: I agree that having the content providers dual-stack is nice to have, of course, and I will applaud it if happens in Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, etc.. BUT it is NOT an immediate need. We should not deploy IPv6-only networks at the LANs. We may have IPv6 only at core

Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

2007-05-29 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
This is useless. Users need to use the same name for both IPv4 and IPv6, they should not notice it. And if there are issues (my experience is not that one), we need to know them ASAP. Any transition means some pain, but as sooner as we start, sooner we can sort it out, if required. Regards,

Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted]

2007-05-30 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
I've been trying to collect the info about services (including ISPs and transit providers) and products (software and hardware) that say they offer IPv6 (still in the phase of verifying one by one, but almost done !). Is still not complete, but I think provides a good picture.

Re: Microsoft and Teredo

2007-05-30 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Hi Nathan, I can probably talk about our own experience ... We started running Teredo Server+Relay in the Windows 2003 implementation around 3-4 years ago (not completely sure right now). Unfortunately, when the Service Pack (SP1 I think) was released, stopped working. Until then it was

Re: IPv6 Training?

2007-05-31 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
We also organize frequently non-for-profit IPv6 workshops at different venues, including ARIN meetings and also dedicated workshops for customers all around the world where there is a demand for it. Regards, Jordi De: William F. Maton Sotomayor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Responder a: [EMAIL

Re: IPv6 Training?

2007-05-31 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
of the nanog net doubling as an ipv6 play area for those of us who otherwise don't have the time to set up and muck with this stuff. I bet if we allocate Sunday morning or afternoon time to another free ipv6 hands on tutorial folks would participate. Bill On 5/31/07, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ [EMAIL

Re: The Choice: IPv4 Exhaustion or Transition to IPv6

2007-06-29 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
In ARIN you have a policy to request IPv6 PI. So what is the problem ? Regards, Jordi De: Christian Kuhtz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Responder a: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fecha: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 13:37:23 + Para: Andy Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], Donald Stahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC:

6to4 and Teredo relays deployment

2007-06-29 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Some weeks ago I started to work in documenting how to setup 6to4 and Teredo relays/servers in several platforms for the afripv6-discuss mailing list. There are many 6to4 relays already, but it becomes even more important to have them where the bandwidth is more expensive, because it avoids

dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

2011-07-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Hi all, I will like to know, from those deploying IPv6 services to residential customers, if you are planning to provide static or dynamic IPv6 prefixes. Just to be clear, I'm for static prefix delegation to residential customers, however I heard that some ISPs are doing dynamic delegations, the

Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

2011-07-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
-Mensaje original- De: Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org Organización: Unfix Responder a: jer...@unfix.org Fecha: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:05:41 +0200 Para: Jordi Palet Martinez jordi.pa...@consulintel.es CC: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org Asunto: Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes

Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers

2011-07-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Para: Jordi Palet Martinez jordi.pa...@consulintel.es CC: NANOG list nanog@nanog.org Asunto: Re: dynamic or static IPv6 prefixes to residential customers On Jul 26, 2011 7:58 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.pa...@consulintel.es wrote: Hi all, I will like to know, from those deploying IPv6 services

Re: IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey

2016-05-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Thanks a lot ¡ Saludos, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: "Aaron C. de Bruyn" <aa...@heyaaron.com> Responder a: <aa...@heyaaron.com> Fecha: domingo, 22 de mayo de 2016, 22:11 Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> CC: John Curran <jcur...@ar

Re: IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey

2016-05-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
This is done so if you are part of a trial can keep answering. Otherwise, no sense to keep going, I guess … In other words, if you don’t offer IPv6 you must not answer to the survey … Saludos, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Christopher Morrow

IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey

2016-05-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Definitively, please respond to the survey. The point here is to be able to tell the ISPs, “hey why are you using /64 instead of /48 (or /56). You know that with /64, your customers can’t have different subnets in their network, for example an /64 in the SSID for guest, or different /64 for

Re: IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey

2016-05-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Hi Aaron, Sorry to heard that. Is the first report I got about this problem (253 responses already and many using Chrome), so may be specific to Chrome+Linux, not sure if you have been able to try with another browser or OS. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG

Re: IPv6 Residential Deployment Survey

2016-05-23 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Hi, The intend is to make the survey simple, so in that case, you have two choices: 1) The same IPv6 services by means of DSL and FTTH (example), then you can use “other” and indicate that. 2) Different IPv6 services with different access technology, then you better fill one survey for each

Re: Spitballing IoT Security

2016-10-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Exactly, I was arguing exactly the same with some folks this week during the RIPE meeting. The same way that certifications are needed to avoid radio interferences, etc., and if you don’t pass those certifications, you can’t sell the products in some countries (or regions in case of EU for

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2016-11-16 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
It happens too often, unfortunately. People deploying IPv6 at web sites and other services, don’t check if PMTUD is broken by filtering, ECMP, load balancers, etc. This is the case here: tbit from 2001:df0:4:4000::1:115 to 2605:3100:fffd:100::15 server-mss 1440, result: pmtud-fail app: http,

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2016-11-16 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
I think it is not just a matter of testing behind a 1280 MTU, but about making sure that PMTUD is not broken, so it just works in any circumstances. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Mark Andrews Responder a:

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2016-11-18 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
I tested from my home and happy eyeballs is not falling back to IPv4. So, I tend to suspect that is not ICMPv6 filtering, but something else, such as wrong load balancer or ECMP configuration. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Carl

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2016-11-20 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
t follow RIPE LABS site: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/jordipaletm/results-of-the-ipv6-deployment-survey Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> en nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> Responder a: <jordi.pa...@consuli

Re: pay.gov and IPv6

2016-11-20 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
l Byington writes: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA512 > > On Sun, 2016-11-20 at 10:51 +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > > For example, you will not get this working if you have a lower MTU > > than 1.500, which is quite norma

Re: BCP for securing IPv6 Linux end node in AWS

2017-05-15 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Just make sure that nothing breaks PTB as it happens if you don’t pay attention to ECMP. RFC7690 1&1 in Germany has this issue since at least 18-24 months ago, so all their customers with IPv6 enabled are *broken* for anyone having a smaller MTU because tunnels or the ISP technology, etc.

plea for increase participation in v6ops/IETF

2017-06-11 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Hello all, At the last LACNIC event, I mentioned on a couple of occasions the need for ISPs in the region, especially small and medium-sized ones, to participate in the decisions taken in the IETF IPv6 Operations Working Group (v6ops). I’m sending this here as well, as I believe the situation

Re: IPv6 migration steps for mid-scale isp

2017-09-18 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Fully agree, 464XLAT is the way to go. We have tested this in many IPv6-only access deployments, non-cellular networks (cellular is well tested by T-Mobile and others, that have got it in production for years). We always have the issue of the CPEs support, but this is the same problem if you

Re: IPv6 migration steps for mid-scale isp

2017-09-25 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
There are several ISPs doing trials (thousands of users). RFC6877 (464XLAT), section 4. Network Architecture, indicates clearly “Wireline Network Architecture can be used in situations where there are clients behind the CLAT, regardless of the type of access service -- for example, fiber

Re: Implementing 464XLAT at a small WISP

2017-12-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Nice ;-) I’ve been doing this for some time already … and have trials with several customers (tens of thousands of customers). Note that most of the routers that support LEDE (quite a big list), will work by default with a standard stable release. You mention it, but we use something like for

Re: Implementing 464XLAT at a small WISP

2017-12-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
echa: jueves, 28 de diciembre de 2017, 10:52 Para: <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> CC: <nanog@nanog.org> Asunto: Re: Implementing 464XLAT at a small WISP On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 1:11 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> wrote: > Nice ;-) >

Re: Implementing 464XLAT at a small WISP

2017-12-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Asunto: Re: Implementing 464XLAT at a small WISP On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 2:43 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.pa...@consulintel.es> wrote: > I’ve customers with have 1Gbit FTTH link using LEDE with NAT. > > Depending on the hardware (I’m talking about Chinese m

Re: Assigning /64 but using /127 (was Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too)

2017-12-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
This may be useful: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690/ Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Octavio Alvarez Responder a: Fecha: jueves, 28 de diciembre de 2017, 19:31 Para:

Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

2017-12-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
Not really. RFC6164 is meant to make sure routers support /127, but doesn’t mandate or say that you must use that. This is another perspective: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-p2p-from-customer-prefix/ Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG

Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

2017-12-20 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
This may be helpful: https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-690/ Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Mike Responder a: Fecha: miércoles, 20 de diciembre de 2017, 19:26

Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

2017-12-20 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
This may be useful as well, somehow related, as using /64 has a clear advantage: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-palet-v6ops-p2p-from-customer-prefix/ Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> en nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

2018-05-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
I don't think, in general the DPAs need to use lawsuits. If they discover (by their own, or by means of a customer claim) that a company (never mind is from the EU or outside) is not following the GDPR, they will just fine it and the corresponding government authorities are the responsible to

Re: What are people using for IPAM these days?

2018-06-10 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
One more open source option: https://www.gestioip.net/ Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Job Snijders Fecha: domingo, 10 de junio de 2018, 23:01 Para: Mike Lyon CC: NANOG Asunto: Re: What are people using for IPAM these days? Hey Mike, On

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

2018-05-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Talking from the experience because the previous laws in Spain, LOPD and LSSI (which basically was the same across the different EU countries). They had "maximum" fines (it was 600.000 Euros). They start for small law infringement with 600 euros, 1.500 euros, unless is something very severe,

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

2018-05-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
.@rollernet.us> Fecha: sábado, 26 de mayo de 2018, 16:00 Para: <nanog@nanog.org> Asunto: Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news On 5/26/18 1:30 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > I don't think, in general the DPAs need to use lawsuits. > > If they discover

Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news

2018-05-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
r...@invaluement.com> Fecha: domingo, 27 de mayo de 2018, 0:16 Para: <nanog@nanog.org> Asunto: Re: Whois vs GDPR, latest news On 5/26/2018 3:36 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > Talking from the experience because the previous laws in Spain, LOPD and LS

Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap

2018-06-22 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
I've many customers using MikroTik. The problem with its IPv6 support is that is only supporting 6in4, which by the way, they call it 6to4, so it is very weird and confusing customers ... So for native IPv6 or a 6in4 tunnel, is fine, but any other transition mechanism is NOT supported, so

Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap

2018-06-22 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
The problem with its IPv6 support is that is only supporting 6in4, which by the way, they call it 6to4, so it is very weird and confusing customers ... That "6-to-4 actually means 6-in-4" was quite confusing to me as well. I just enabled it to prove that they had a language moment there. Good

Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap

2018-06-22 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
the LTE interface, but space for it). Regards, Jordi De: Mark Tinka Fecha: viernes, 22 de junio de 2018, 13:23 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ CC: "nanog@nanog.org" Asunto: Re: IPv6 faster/better proof? was Re: Need /24 (arin) asap On 22/Jun/18 12:47, JORDI PALET MART

Re: new(ish) ipv6 transition tech status on CPE

2018-10-10 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
You may use this document, which passed already the last-call and is in the AD/IESG review: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas/ My co-authors may help you to get those products … I’ve been using myself OpenWRT for such deployments. Regards, Jordi

Re: Deploying IPv6 XLAT64

2018-09-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
You can use Jool for both 464XLAT and just NAT64. I've done a workshop on this at the LACNIC meeting this week. See slides 43 and next ones: http://www.lacnic.net/innovaportal/file/3139/1/ipv6-only_v11_16-9.pdf Saludos, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: NANOG en nombre de Matt Hoppes

Re: Deploying IPv6 XLAT64

2018-09-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
apps that use literals, or they don't support IPv6, you still need dual-stack in the LANs, but access IPv6-only is just fine. Regards, Jordi -Mensaje original- De: Matt Hoppes Fecha: miércoles, 26 de septiembre de 2018, 15:22 Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ , North American Network

Re: Auto-configuring IPv6 transition mechanisms on customer devices

2018-12-14 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi Brandon, This may help: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-transition-ipv4aas/ It is in last call right now, I need to send a new version today/tomorrow, as the IESG review had some inputs, but nothing that change the document as you can read it now. Regards, Jordi

Re: IPv6 and forensic requests

2019-02-10 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Do you really mean 6to4 or NAT64? Totally different things ... If that's the case, I will suggest you go for Jool instead of Tayga. Also, if you want the customers are able to use old IPv4 apps and devices, NAT64 is not sufficient, you need also CLAT at the customer premises (so they can run

Re: IPv6 and forensic requests

2019-02-10 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
6to4 to certain public IPv4. But it seems mobile need a /64, and it uses a lot of random IPv6 inside assigned /64, several addresses together at each time, CLAT uses the most of it (on Android). So direct translation 6->public4 is impossible. 10.02.19 15:51, JORDI PALET MARTI

Re: IPv6 and forensic requests

2019-02-10 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
NANOG en nombre de Max Tulyev Fecha: domingo, 10 de febrero de 2019, 19:21 Para: NANOG Asunto: Re: IPv6 and forensic requests Great, thank you! Did you manage to whitelist APN at Apple so iOS devices can use it too? 10.02.19 20:06, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ пише: > Well, if

contacts for two abuse cases - cloudstar.is and heficed.com

2019-06-12 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
We are getting since several weeks ago, intrusion attempts via SIP (among others) from: 1) cloudstar.is - They are not responding at all. 2) heficed.com - The people responding is "unable" to resolve it. In both cases the attacks come from different IP addresses. So, anyone has a "realiable"

Re: IPv6 ingress filter

2019-05-14 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi Amos, Just responded in another mailing list on this: 6to4 is still a valid protocol. IT SHOULD NOT be filtered. 6to4 uses the same protocol as other tunnels such as 6in4 (protocol 41). https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3056.txt It works fine for peer to peer applications. What

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
The intent is to clearly state that this is a violation of the policies. The membership documents/bylaws or the RSA, your account may be closed. I looked at it when adapting the policy from RIPE to ARIN, don't have this information right in my mind, but I'm sure it was there. Otherwise, if

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
RSA (https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsa.pdf) clearly state that the services are subject to the terms and conditions stated in the policy manual. There is explicit text in case of lack of payment. Not so clear what to do if there is a policy violation, but it looks like at

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
olicy violation". El 27/4/19 0:08, "Jon Lewis" escribió: On Fri, 26 Apr 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > The intent is to clearly state that this is a violation of the policies. > > The membership documents/bylaws or the RSA, your account may be close

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Not only that. I really think they have not invested enough time to read the proposal, check with the authors and then take a decision. We have got some email exchange, but clearly not sufficient. I also must state that the staff has been very helpful and diligent to clarify and support the

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
, etc., etc. Regards, Jordi El 27/4/19 0:03, "NANOG en nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG" escribió: The intent is to clearly state that this is a violation of the policies. The membership documents/bylaws or the RSA, your account may be closed. I looked

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi, El 27/4/19 1:35, "Jared Mauch" escribió: > On Apr 26, 2019, at 5:49 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: > > "AP stated that at the LACNIC meeting has discussed it and they dismissed it as out of scope." > > LACNIC will have

Re: Open Petition for ARIN-prop-266: BGP Hijacking is an ARIN Policy Violation

2019-04-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
El 26/4/19 20:25, "NANOG en nombre de Matt Harris" escribió: On Fri, Apr 26, 2019 at 12:49 PM William Herrin wrote: I personally support the petition. I think the out of scope reasoning is flawed. By enforcing minimum assignment sizes, ARIN has long acted as a gatekeeper to the routing

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-02 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
this gives a cost of USD 1.25 per user for a fully redundant solution. For us it is even cheaper as we can recirculate existing address space. Regards, Baldur On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 5:32 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote: I understand that, but the inconvenient is the fix allocation of

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-02 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
of having to run a redundant NAT server setup with thousands of users. MAP is the only alternative that avoids a provider run NAT server. Regards, Baldur On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 3:38 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: Ask the vendor to support RFC8585. Also,

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-03 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
> The cost of sharing IPs in a static way, is that services such as > SonyPlaystation Network will put those addresses in the black list, > so you need to buy more addresses. This hasn’t been the case for > 464XLAT/NAT64, which shares the addresses dynamically. A

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-02 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Ask the vendor to support RFC8585. Also, you can do it with OpenWRT. I think 464XLAT is a better option and both of them are supported by OpenWRT. You can also use OpenSource (Jool) for the NAT64. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 2/8/19 14:20, "NANOG en nombre de Baldur

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-05 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
This is not surprising to me as Dlink was one of my co-authors for RFC8585 ... and they indicated in v6ops that implementing CLAT was really easy. I guess they need to improve the GUI, etc. Note that with 464XLAT, you still need the NAT64 at the ISP side, and also, the traceroutes will shows

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-08 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
I think the only reason DS-Lite got more implementations is that it was the first and "only" choice or IPv6-only with IPv4aaS. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 8/8/19 22:57, "NANOG en nombre de Jay Hanke" escribió: > I can't think of a public presentation off the top of my head that

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-08 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi Lee, I recall the original sender of this post indicated a small number of users, that’s why I responded that. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 8/8/19 22:17, "NANOG en nombre de Lee Howard" escribió: On 8/2/19 1:10 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote:

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-08 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
rt team spending their time. CPE support is the next big frontier in IPv6 deployment. Lee > > On Fri, Aug 2, 2019 at 10:34 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG > wrote: >> I understand that, but the inconvenient is the fix allocation of ports per

Re: MAP-E

2019-08-06 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
The difference is that 464XLAT/NAT64 is the only one that runs in cellular networks. Also with 464XLAT, you don't need DNS64. This document is already in the RFC Editor Queue: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-nat64-deployment/ El 6/8/19 1:24, "NANOG en nombre de Mark

Re: CGNAT Solutions

2020-04-28 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
I will say it is much better to consider 464XLAT with NAT64, if the CPEs allow it. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8683/ I’m right now doing a deployment for 25.000.000 customers of an ISP (GPON, DLS and cellular mix), all the testing has been done, and all doing fine. I’ve done

Re: CGNAT Solutions

2020-04-30 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
And more and more CPE providers support it. See RFC8585. I inititally started using OpenWRT, but now I already got samples from several vendors. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 30/4/20 6:16, "NANOG en nombre de Ca By" escribió: On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 7:17 PM

Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

2020-05-13 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
It is curious how many times we have heard that, not only heard in NANOG and other NOGs, but also in IETF, even debated in long thread with several IDs, and for some strange reason, we all missed that or maybe because nobody got the running code to demonstrate his/her point in a realistic way?

Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

2020-05-13 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
y" From: NANOG on behalf of JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 11:17 PM To: NANOG list Subject: Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election It is curious how many times we have heard that, not only heard in NANOG and other NOGs, but also in IETF, even debated in long thr

Re: RIPE NCC Executive Board election

2020-05-13 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi Ronald, The election starts today, but in order to be able to vote, you need to pre-register with your organizations before 16:00 Amsterdam time *today*. Here is the info and registration link: https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/meetings/may-2020/voting-at-the-gm and the list of

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-30 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
ost CPE as a "bridge" to its real network. El 30/8/20 3:05, "NANOG en nombre de Brandon Martin" escribió: On 8/26/20 12:48 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > I work and I'm in touch with many CPE vendors since long time ago ... many are on the way (I ca

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
This is why we wrote RFC8585, so users can freely buy their own router ... The ISP can also list some of the compatible models in case they are using "additional" features. El 25/8/20 22:16, "NANOG en nombre de Brandon Martin" escribió: On 8/25/20 3:38 PM, JORD

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
to migrate as they are able/need to. If you try and force the change, you will loose users. > On Aug 25, 2020, at 3:15 PM, Brandon Martin wrote: > > On 8/25/20 3:38 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: >> This is very common in many countries and not related to IPv6, bu

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
g 2020, at 16:51, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > > No, this doesn't work > > The point your're missing (when I talked before about putting all the costs to make a good calculation of each case and then replacing CPEs become actually cheaper) is that you

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-25 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
> Many vendors are running on top of OpenWRT or Linux, and both of them have > CLAT support. > > Unfortunately, I can't give names which aren't already published, such as > Sagemcom, D-Link, NEC and Technicolor. Believe me there are others, you just > need to ask them. This shouldn't be

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-25 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
OG en nombre de Mark Tinka" escribió: On 24/Aug/20 17:21, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > You probably mean 464XLAT > > Ask you vendors. They should support it. Ask for RFC8585 support, even better. > > If they don't do, is because

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-25 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
, "NANOG en nombre de Mark Tinka" escribió: On 25/Aug/20 19:36, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: --- I’ve managed to get better support from vendors which are different than Mikrotik. Some years ago, I even offered Mikrotik *free* help to correctly do transition … and

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-25 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
This is very common in many countries and not related to IPv6, but because many operators have special configs or features in the CPEs they provide. If you don’t use our own CPE, we can’t warrantee the service neither the support. El 25/8/20 21:00, "NANOG en nombre de Mike Hammett"

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
t; escribió: On 8/26/20 2:48 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > This is why we wrote RFC8585, so users can freely buy their own router ... It's a great RFC. Hopefully it continues to gain traction. Do you know of a single router available in the US (or even br

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
less PMTUD issues) as turning on 464XLAT in the CPE. Traffic shifts to IPv6 due to hosts preferring IPv6. You can still disable sending RA’s in either scenario. > >Mark > >> On 26 Aug 2020, at 16:51, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: >> >

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
They know we are there ... so they don't come! By the way I missed this in the previous email: I heard (not sure how much true on that) that they are "forced" to avoid CGN because the way games are often programmed in PSP break them. So maybe will not be enough to sort out the problem with an

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
onses in-line... > On Aug 27, 2020, at 2:22 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > > You need to understand the different way NAT64 works vs CGN (and 464XLAT uses NAT64 for the translation): The ports are allocated "on demand" in NAT64. > > W

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
> So for 464XLAT I will need to install a PLAT capable device(s)... PLAT support has been around already with the traditional vendors. It's not new. [Jordi] NAT64 (PLAT) is there available in excellent open source implementations. You can use VMs in big rackable servers and it gets

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
port since X-BOX One. > On Aug 26, 2020, at 1:09 PM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 26/Aug/20 18:42, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > >> The crazy thing is that PSN doesn't (up to my knowledge) yet work with IPv6 ... > > To

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-26 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
:23 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > > They know we are there ... so they don't come! > > By the way I missed this in the previous email: I heard (not sure how much true on that) that they are "forced" to avoid CGN because the way games are oft

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
This one is the published version: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8683/ El 27/8/20 8:10, "NANOG en nombre de Mark Tinka" escribió: On 27/Aug/20 07:58, Bjørn Mork wrote: > Because NAT64 implies DNS64, which avoids NATing any dual stack service. > This makes a major

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-27 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
t a single host behind the NAT can have to the same destination address and port. El 27/8/20 6:55, "Brian Johnson" escribió: Responses in-line > On Aug 26, 2020, at 4:07 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG wrote: > > Because: > > 1)

Re: Ipv6 help

2020-08-24 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
You probably mean 464XLAT Ask you vendors. They should support it. Ask for RFC8585 support, even better. If they don't do, is because they are interested only in selling new boxes ... just something to think in the future about those vendors. I can tell you that many vendors now support

Re: Compromized modems in Thai IP Space

2020-08-11 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
I don't know what you tried in APNIC, my experience is that they are usually responding very quickly. Have you tried the abuse contacts of the ISP? If they fail, have you tried to escalate to escalation-ab...@apnic.net, following our abuse-mailbox proposal

Re: CGNAT Opensource with support to BPA, EIM/EIF, UPnP-PCP

2020-07-07 Thread JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG
Hi Douglas, There was, long time ago, something developed by ISC, but I think never completed and not updated … 464XLAT is always a solution and becomes much cheaper, than CGN from vendors, even if you need to replace the CPEs. I’m doing that now with 25.000.000 subscribers … (slowed

  1   2   >