Marco Schmidt - 20-05-2021 10:24:30
Good morning,
I'm Marco Schmidt from the RIPE NCC. This chat panel is meant for discussion ONLY. If you have questions for the speaker and you want the session chair to read it out, please write it in the Q&A window also stating your affiliation. Otherwise, you can ask questions using the microphone icon.
Please note that all chat transcripts will be archived and made available to the public on https://ripe82.ripe.net/.
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:24:48
we can hear you!
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 10:24:57
Goedenmorgen allemaal
Remco van Zuijlen - 20-05-2021 10:25:05
hee Eric
Marco Schmidt - 20-05-2021 10:25:07
Jen
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:25:18
jen: slide upload is via the "mechanics" button up right
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 10:25:25
Hi Remco
Tim Chown - 20-05-2021 10:25:33
thaty only has change devices on it
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:26:22
Tim: for you :-) - for the chairs, it has "manage slides upload"
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 10:26:37
Political korret is so 1990 ;-)
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:26:51
but usually the ops folks transport "uploaded to the ripe82 web page" to meetecho for you
Marco Davids - 20-05-2021 10:27:50
Eric: Woke it is, nowadays!
Tim Chown - 20-05-2021 10:28:04
i no have superpowers to do it :)
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:28:31
awesome
Remco van Zuijlen - 20-05-2021 10:28:39
or the font...
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 10:28:44
The color of winners during Football ;-)
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 10:29:06
peach colour
Wolfgang Zenker - 20-05-2021 10:29:13
Nice font, as usual :-)
Peter Koch - 20-05-2021 10:29:30
@chairs: you have to be transparent on transparency
Harry Cross - 20-05-2021 10:29:49
When are we moving to a blackboard and a bit of chalk for presentations :P
Brian Trammell - 20-05-2021 10:29:52
slightly bandpassed but very understandable.
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 10:29:55
geographically challenged
Marco Hogewoning - 20-05-2021 10:30:06
Jen: you have a boat, don't you?
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:30:17
jen: you should be happy that you are not in eu crazeland
Brian Trammell - 20-05-2021 10:30:32
...i am now disappointed that Jen is not joining us from a boat....
Daniel Karrenberg - 20-05-2021 10:30:37
Moin!
David Schweizer - 20-05-2021 10:30:45
the font ...
Elmar K. Bins - 20-05-2021 10:30:58
Moin und Garfschüttel
Guillaume Rousseau - 20-05-2021 10:31:00
Wait for the wordart... ;-)
David Schweizer - 20-05-2021 10:31:15
:grin:
Wolfgang Tremmel - 20-05-2021 10:31:21
orange slides this early in the morning
Daniel Karrenberg - 20-05-2021 10:31:49
Jen must have cloned Randy's laptop and personalised it a little ..... ;-)
Marco Hogewoning - 20-05-2021 10:31:49
@brian; actually good point - I am kinda curious if any of you is brave enough to try and use satellite to participate?Any starlink pilots? Does it hold up with video like this?
David Schweizer - 20-05-2021 10:31:50
no need for redshift anymore.
Daniel Karrenberg - 20-05-2021 10:32:00
I have *not* read the minutes .....
Peter Koch - 20-05-2021 10:32:04
new chat feature: one submission (10:26:37) is stuck to the bottom here
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 10:32:07
I'm turning screen saturation down...
Nigel Hickson - 20-05-2021 10:32:10
Good morning.
Falk von Bornstaedt - 20-05-2021 10:32:27
Good morning
Nigel Hickson - 20-05-2021 10:32:30
Too orange...):
Wolfgang Zenker - 20-05-2021 10:33:15
clap clap
Wolfgang Zenker - 20-05-2021 10:33:22
applause
Andreas Wittkemper - 20-05-2021 10:33:27
clap clap
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 10:33:34
claps
Christian Adler - 20-05-2021 10:33:42
:wave:
Éric Vyncke - 20-05-2021 10:33:59
clap clap to Jen
Peter Koch - 20-05-2021 10:34:01
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
Brian Trammell - 20-05-2021 10:38:36
nicaragua
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:41:02
🥳
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:41:58
somebody tell Clarence...
Ruben van Staveren - 20-05-2021 10:45:17
apparently I get a url not found on https://stats.labs.apnic.net/v6frags
Lars Prehn - 20-05-2021 10:45:32
@Geoff Awesome, thanks for the clarification!
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:46:04
https://stats.labs.apnic.net/v6frag
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:46:11
without the 's' at the end
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 10:46:15
Thanks Jen :)
Ruben van Staveren - 20-05-2021 10:46:44
thx @Julien!
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:48:25
could it be the MTU & general path difference between copper/DSL vs. fiber & LTE?
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 10:48:36
Are people doing SRH?
Wolfgang Zenker - 20-05-2021 10:48:53
applause!
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:48:54
I'm checking France datas and it seems sample size are a bit far from reality
Yannis Nikolopoulos - 20-05-2021 10:48:56
thank you Geoff!
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 10:49:01
claps
Lars Prehn - 20-05-2021 10:49:04
:clap:
Ivan Beveridge - 20-05-2021 10:49:04
Very interesting talk/results - thanks Geoff!
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 10:49:06
thanks, Geoff!
Donald Neal - 20-05-2021 10:49:07
Thanks, Geoff.
Miquel van Smoorenburg - 20-05-2021 10:49:14
we need an applause button
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:49:15
thanks geoff
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:49:15
thanks Geoff!
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 10:49:21
+1
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:50:40
thanks, this is helpful
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 10:52:07
huzzah!
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:52:32
RFC7600 4RD?
Éric Vyncke - 20-05-2021 10:53:04
OTOH mobile devices usually use IPv6 on TWO interfaces while normal hosts have a single interface
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:53:33
off to the mailing list with me...
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 10:54:29
Feedback please! :) What do you think of updating RIPE554?
Éric Vyncke - 20-05-2021 10:54:30
opsecv6 is approved by the IESG ;-)
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:55:15
fragment & EH handling!
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 10:55:27
SNMP is old school for CPE _> TR369
Harry Cross - 20-05-2021 10:55:27
Since this should be a living document that is always being updated, I think that the community need a way for these living documents to constantly be updated
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 10:56:05
@Blake as OPTIONAL or MUST NOT? ;)
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 10:56:30
Harry it's a great suggestion, but also keep in mind that the intention is for vendors to use this as a development roadmap, so it shouldn't be a moving target
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 10:57:16
@blake, exactly. Operators need to be able to RFP against such a document, and know what they got.
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 10:58:26
We have discussed making it a living doc before, and the RFP thing is an issue. You don't want to have to specify "RIPE9999 from 2022-04-01 at 12:34:56.42"
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 10:58:45
agile!
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 10:59:05
:)
Julien Escario - 20-05-2021 10:59:09
yes
Kostas Zorbadelos - 20-05-2021 10:59:15
Hi Yannis!
Harry Cross - 20-05-2021 10:59:27
Maybe 2 versions, a "live" version containing ideals, and then every so often this is pushed into the gospel document
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:00:02
Monthly release of the document? ;)
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:00:29
yearly would not be awful...
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:00:32
/me looks at Jen
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:00:50
Jan: keep looking ;) I have my video stream off...
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:01:02
:)
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:03:49
what's a dual-stack CGN? Does that mean that both v4 and v6 packets go through the same chassis?
Chriztoffer Hansen - 20-05-2021 11:03:57
@Jan: Half-yearly? Would correspond with the number of RIPE Meetings in any given year
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 11:04:20
@Michael just means the end user has native IPv6 + NAT444
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:06:39
@Chriztoffer: then we are not talking about RIPE document anymore, but something else...
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:06:46
@Chriztoffer doing a new version at every RIPE meeting would drive our poor chairs crazy
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:07:12
Sander: We'd just need to request a second slot, that's it ;)
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:07:30
Also: changing requirements that quickly doesn't exactly give the impression to management that IPv6 is stable enough to deploy
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:07:49
I think an update every 2 years would be enough
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:08:05
agree Sander, 2 years sounds like a good cadence
Ivan Beveridge - 20-05-2021 11:08:17
@sander: indeed. Vendors will not follow constant changes as there is no benefit to them.
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:08:24
IMHO we do not need releases just for sake of a new release. If smth has changed and the doc needs to be updated - let's update it. Even if the last release was 3 moths ago.
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:08:48
from my time at a smaller network equipment vendor, every year (or more) would likely convince us to ignore these requirement doc.
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:08:51
and if there have been no changes for last 3 years - good, the doc is still up to date..
Elvis Daniel Velea - 20-05-2021 11:09:25
quit slack
Elvis Daniel Velea - 20-05-2021 11:09:45
I was checking all chat rooms to see who's messaging me :))
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:09:47
ROFL, I kept looking for what was making that noise! :D
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:11:07
important thing is also the stability of the RIPE document number where people point to or reference. If that number is frequently changed, that confuses people running tenders.
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:11:24
The reason I think keeping a schedule is to make sure we keep thinking about it. Consciously checking whether it is still accurate every two years at least makes sure that we don't get the current situation where the doc is 9 years old and severely out of date
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:11:59
so, our main line of thinking was "is the pain of not updating the document bigger than the pain of changing its RIPE number?"
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:12:16
Sander: so I guess you need IETF I-Ds to include RIPE docs into 'Updates' field ;)
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:12:16
So I was thinking "review at least every two years", not "exactly every 2 years" or "not before 2 years" :D
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:12:42
@jen: yes please ;)
Harry Cross - 20-05-2021 11:12:50
@Sander, this is where having a living version would help as well, because the new addition work is constantly being done
Marco Hogewoning - 20-05-2021 11:13:28
is that in the document? Does it make sense to put a para in saying "this document should be reviewed XX months after publication"
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:13:31
@Harry: there is a living version :) It's on Google doc and we are using it to draft a new version ;)
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:13:41
@harry: to have any value there has to be consensus on the contents of the document. How do you see that happening?
Peter Koch - 20-05-2021 11:16:31
@marcoh taht could be tricky in procurement processes
Marco Hogewoning - 20-05-2021 11:17:29
this is guidance right? Not to be used literally
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:17:36
it's always an MTU problem... & everyone wants to relegate "the Internet" to a tunnel underlay...
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:17:43
if it's not DNS, it's MTU
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:17:52
obvious question, why can't they use baby jumbos inside their own network?
Frederic Hermann - 20-05-2021 11:17:53
+1
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:17:54
@marco: it is written as such, but plenty of people reference it verbatim
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:18:26
@peter: that will come in the next slides :)
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 11:18:33
I was expecting Cisco to say "buy the VSM"
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:19:04
@marco if as a manuf I saw that, and noticed that today's date was past that, then I would spend a lot of time and effort to look for the updated document. and if it wasn't published because there was no reason to do so, that would actually waste more of my time.
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:19:05
@MarcoH: it was supposed to be a guidance, a template if you will... but people in many cases just says "it has to comply with RIPE554"... and that's something that can't be verified or exist as it's a template, really
Ondřej Caletka - 20-05-2021 11:19:07
MTU issues are really hard to detect. For instance you ssh to a machine, issue dmesg command and the SSH just dies silently.
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:19:16
"your v6 fragmentation license has expired"
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 11:19:19
@peter, indeed, probably relying on many 3rd parties for backhaul and access
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:19:57
I was trying to lobby to making net.ipv4.tcp_mtu_probing=2 the default on Linux, etc.
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:20:09
(that enables plpmtu for IPv6 too)
Richard Patterson - 20-05-2021 11:20:20
We're using MAP-T so have made sure to handle 1520, and then found out our BR adds a fragmentation header for all packets where IPv4 DF=0, even if it doesn't need fragmenting
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:20:30
Alas, the people who ought to have good data that this is okay, turn out to never send TCP segments bigger than 1400.
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 11:20:41
increasing an MTU afterwards is always painful
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:21:50
Yannis, everyone in my family has Cosmote VDSL/vector at home & it works great, thanks for this effort.
Ioanna Fouraki - 20-05-2021 11:22:51
great presentation Yannis, thank you, I miss the team!
Marco Hogewoning - 20-05-2021 11:24:27
ok, b ut still @peter what is the harm - you reference it, it says "subject to review". Pretty commoin, in fact most EU legislation has clauses like that "we'll look at this in X months to see if it needs updates"Depends on the wording IMHO but review does not mean repeal it
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:25:04
@marco I think keeping the review process in the WG would be better than including it in the doc
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:26:02
@Marco yes, I agree. I'm just saying some vendors (and customers) will take that line as gospel truth, and it can create unnecessary complications.
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:26:24
I agree with @sander's suggestion of keeping that guidance internal to the WG instead of directly in the doc
Miquel van Smoorenburg - 20-05-2021 11:26:34
The goverment making all their websites available on IPv6 as well will not stimulate anything. making them IPv6-only, now ...
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:27:03
I can always deploy some more NAT64 boxes for other governments ;)
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:27:27
I love NAT64.
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:27:58
+1 on Miquel.
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:27:58
@Miguel: true :) :) :)
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:28:17
I run two NAT64 gateways for Dutch municipalities to make their IPv4-only websites reachable over IPv6. Not ideal, but it gets the ball rolling.
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:28:18
ipv6.covidshot.org
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:28:26
@Miquel, even #typo
Venu Gopal Kakarla - 20-05-2021 11:28:27
I like NAT64 too, but my only gripe with it is that it breaks DNSSEC
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:28:58
It breaks DNSSEC mostly for strange people who sign the zones but refuse to enable IPv6...
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:28:59
@veno: not in this use case, because the IPv6 address of the webserver is actually published in DNS
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:28:59
yeah, so DNS64 needs to run locally. But, number of places that have deployed DNSSEC and do not also have IPv6?
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:29:14
@mcr 404
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:29:40
The bigger issue is IPv4 literal, IMHO.
Sander Steffann - 20-05-2021 11:29:49
@jen ACK
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:31:49
strange people that deploy DNSSEC and not IPv6 should be ignored, in none of the 464XLAT deployments that I'm aware of, there was a single customer complain anyway.
Radu-Adrian Feurdean - 20-05-2021 11:32:10
I was thinking what would give to have a modification in the resolving library to return error if you feed a literal IP address instead of DNS name. That was more with regards to internal guys (devs) who insist on not using DNS, but may have other uses....
Florian Streibelt - 20-05-2021 11:32:10
*waiting for browser vendors implementing v4 tunneling*
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:32:31
@florian: over DoH?
Florian Streibelt - 20-05-2021 11:32:34
application layer to the rescue *scnr*
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:32:47
Note that DNSSEC is ONLY broken if the end-host is running a validator, so not common at all. See https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8683/
Florian Streibelt - 20-05-2021 11:33:14
@Gert so we can do DoT via v4 only vpn via DoH?
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:33:15
Jordi: wait for individual apps to start doing their own resolution...
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:33:44
if the end-host is running a dnssec validator and isn't comparing nat64 aaaa to the a record, then that's their problem
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:34:05
Florian I want to see a little 464xlat client unikernel compiled for WebAssembly running in the browser :-)
Florian Streibelt - 20-05-2021 11:34:06
@Peter: just one word... systemd *runs for cover*
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:34:17
@Florian like I said, that's their problem
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:34:27
@Jen: agree, but those app developers should make sure that either the hosts are IPv6 enabled or they do local synthesis, so DNSSEC is not broken. This is already resolved by HappyEyeballs v2 as well
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:35:11
@florian did mozilla not announce their intentions to offer VPN service from their bwosers?
Shane Kerr - 20-05-2021 11:35:20
At 2% growth per year we'll be done in less than 40 years! Winning!!!
Florian Streibelt - 20-05-2021 11:35:23
@Gert yes
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:35:43
@florian of course that will be IPv4-only, so, problem solved
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:35:47
Jordi: they *should* indeed...
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 11:37:43
if the dnsvalidatorknows the DNS64 prefix it can validate ?
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:37:53
yes.
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:38:15
Christian Bretterhofer: yes, and the network can even provide that info
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:38:16
yes, and ipv4only.arpa exists in part to help you discover the dns64 prefix
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:38:23
the DNS64 "lie" then occurs after the validation.
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 11:38:24
and if the DNS64 prefix is known why not put it in (local)dns
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:38:43
Christian Bretterhofer: we have an RA option for that even ;)
Lutz Donnerhacke - 20-05-2021 11:38:48
DNSSEC is able to deal with DNS64.
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:38:56
@christian, the DNS64 prefix can be different on different networks.
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 11:39:40
true, but in enterprises dns validator and prefix should be coordinated anyway
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:39:42
query the dhcp/dhcpv6/RA provided server, and query that name. that'll give you enough information to fetch the dns64 prefix
Lutz Donnerhacke - 20-05-2021 11:39:50
But just don't do this. If a site is ipv4 only, it's not important anymore
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:39:58
@lutz github.com
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:40:17
twitter (is that a bug, though? ;) )
Lutz Donnerhacke - 20-05-2021 11:40:21
@peter What's that? A source code dealer?
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:40:43
it's a trashfire, pretending to hold source code
Lutz Donnerhacke - 20-05-2021 11:41:23
IPv6 is primary a matter of attitude of the admins
Andreas Härpfer - 20-05-2021 11:41:35
@lutz amazon.{de,com,…}
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:41:43
I look up gitlab's AAAA, and wonder if there is some message in the IID that I'm missing. I still like sprint.net's use of 2600::
Venu Gopal Kakarla - 20-05-2021 11:42:14
Github uses Fastly CDN which has v6. They just refuse to publish AAAA
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:42:29
@Lutz Your statement might true for small companies. Not the case for anything mid/large size
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:42:43
@venu then they don't have v6
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 11:42:48
https://dnsviz.net/d/github.com/dnssec/ no DNSEC anyway
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:43:11
amazon EC + Docker + IPv6 results in containers being unable to do outgoing IPv6 :-(
Lutz Donnerhacke - 20-05-2021 11:43:41
@Jen in larger companies, it's much easier. You will not be held accountable personally, because you can point to an RFC and the compliance department for refusing IPv4 only
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:43:49
@venu, what you are saying is that github doesn't have some problem being unable to upgrade their load balancer?
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 11:43:59
@Venu they're an interesting case because they have a huge dev toolchain ecosystem. And so they can't count on happy eyeballs always being there.
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:44:34
happy eyeballs considered harmful
Flavio Palumbo - 20-05-2021 11:44:41
good job Paolo !
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:44:50
@Eliot, {v6,ds}.github.com would be an option, which they seem to ignore.
Dmitry Serbulov - 20-05-2021 11:44:57
YEAR BY EAR - Die child DISCUSSION
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:45:17
@eliot: in 2021, I consider this a lame excuse
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:45:31
turn on ipv6, fix any remaining issues
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 11:46:10
@Gert the point is that they don't own the tools in question. So the economics may not work in v6's favor here yet.
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 11:46:37
but surely there's a git issue tracker one could post into.
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:46:59
it breaks, it's on IPv4-only :)
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:47:03
If we all refuse to use datacenters or services which are IPv4-only, we will help to push to resolve the problem ... instead of github, use something else, instead of Amazon, something else, etc.
Eliot Lear - 20-05-2021 11:47:22
Jan you beat me to it ;-)
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:47:23
Christian, the business case for deploying IPv6 is selling off your IPv4 at >20€/addr
Peter Hessler - 20-05-2021 11:47:33
@Jordi while good advice, they are effectively monopolies today
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:47:36
@Eliot: :)
Venu Gopal Kakarla - 20-05-2021 11:47:47
@eiliot breaking the tools applies pressure on the tools to be fixed.
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:47:49
gitlab does v6, and it does not break the ecosystem
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:47:59
so this is all lame excuses again
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:48:25
@Peter, I think that was the case for the IPv4-IPv6 discussion a few years ago, but not anymore. There are sufficient "IPv6-enabled" players, to be able to choose from.
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:48:30
https://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+excuses
Dmitry Serbulov - 20-05-2021 11:48:33
Realy we need to say NOW: we do not have understanding, how to move to IPv6? And we can't say that Ipv6 is realy good in security and privating.
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 11:48:46
I'd like to "hear" IPv4 in VoIP - can't there be artificial noise introduced to the "old network"?
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:49:04
@kurt, I like that :-)
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 11:49:17
or an HD-only codec that just works with v6?
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 11:49:34
https://ipv6bingo.com/ gets a little be outdated
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:49:50
@Dmitry Serbulov: I'm not sure what you mean. Many networks have moved, (some even moved to IPv6-only). If you have any specific questions - this group would be happy to help
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:50:03
introduce couple of ms of delay into IPv4 on each router and problem is solved ;)
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 11:50:28
@Jan: yes - make the difference "audible" :-)
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:50:36
<giggle>
Jordi Palet Martinez - 20-05-2021 11:51:16
@Jan, that already happens, Facebook, Akamai, others, already reported up to 40% "faster" (time to complete HTTP get) with IPv6, because NAT in CPEs, translation in datacenters, CGN, etc.
Dmitry Serbulov - 20-05-2021 11:51:19
@Jen Linkova 25% for more than 5 years...
Silvan Gebhardt - 20-05-2021 11:51:50
can't hear you
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:51:56
meanwhile, webex doesn't work with public IPv4 or public IPv6. It you aren't NAT44'ed, then it fails!
Dmitry Serbulov - 20-05-2021 11:52:03
@Jen Linkova If it will not to do China it will be more smaller %.
Wolfgang Zenker - 20-05-2021 11:52:08
@Dmitry it may depend on what you are doing and what your peers are doing. I work in web hosting, we have moved to dual stack many years ago and started the move to ipv6-only some 3 years ago
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:52:42
We are all Jen.
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:53:11
good one, Michael :)
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:53:15
I have recently given "IPv6 only inside, stateless(!) NAT46 in front" quite a bit of thought, and it sounds more exciting every day. But people are not progressive enough...
Michael Richardson - 20-05-2021 11:53:38
We are all J[aeiou]n!
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:53:46
Gert: that works quite well, at least for my home network ;)
Tim Chown - 20-05-2021 11:53:59
Isnt that the SIIT DC method?
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:54:04
Tim: yes
Tim Chown - 20-05-2021 11:54:08
ok :)
Gert Doering - 20-05-2021 11:54:23
I'm not that smart... Tore is :-)
Venu Gopal Kakarla - 20-05-2021 11:54:27
Starting a datacenter business today and going ipv6 only, it is hard to compete with the yesteryear players who have hoarded v4 addresses and are giving them away free to their customers.
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:54:39
;))))
Silvan Gebhardt - 20-05-2021 11:54:46
unless you make this your brand, I think ungleich does an amazing job on that
Venu Gopal Kakarla - 20-05-2021 11:55:24
Ungleich is amazing. Nico is really cool to do that.
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 11:55:52
firewall: problem between keyboard & chair...
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 11:58:26
we used to have nat64check tool to measure this kind of stuff... :)
Jen Linkova - 20-05-2021 11:59:18
Blake: I've started building such a site but got distracted
Christian Bretterhofer - 20-05-2021 12:00:26
Jan: nat64check is brocken now since long time?
Blake Willis - 20-05-2021 12:00:27
Jen sounds like a job for an intern/GSC :-)
Veronika McKillop - 20-05-2021 12:00:31
great session, thank you to all speakers!
Eric van Uden - 20-05-2021 12:00:40
Tot ziens
Jan Žorž - 20-05-2021 12:00:40
cheers, bye!!!
Tahar Schaa - 20-05-2021 12:00:41
bye, nice session
Milad Afshari - 20-05-2021 12:00:42
Thanks all
Kurt Kayser - 20-05-2021 12:00:46
@Blake: an IPv4-mike..
Mohamad Choaib - 20-05-2021 12:00:48
thanks
Ruben van Staveren - 20-05-2021 12:00:56
:clap:
