Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi, at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6. We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples. I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me. Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter. Best, Wilhelm
Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> wrote: > We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One > possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT > departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. They have no management mandate on spending their time on it. > From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining > the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and > examples. It's true that they need clear guidance, but since one size does not fit all, that doesn't help much. > I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this > with me. I suggest in order to be successful, one really needs an iterative approach. One needs to include actual IT departments, take their feedback, and iterate. -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
On 30 May 2023, at 18:50, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> wrote: We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. They have no management mandate on spending their time on it. From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples. It's true that they need clear guidance, but since one size does not fit all, that doesn't help much. I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me. I suggest in order to be successful, one really needs an iterative approach. One needs to include actual IT departments, take their feedback, and iterate. Hello, here is some work the Swedish Post and Telecom Authority have done. In Swedish but by Google Translate here. <https://pts-se.translate.goog/sv/bransch/internet/ipv6/dags-att-infora-ipv6/ipv6---it-tekniker/?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=sv&_x_tr_pto=wapp> [pts_flagga_568x275_363x176.jpg] Till dig som IT-tekniker | PTS<https://pts-se.translate.goog/sv/bransch/internet/ipv6/dags-att-infora-ipv6/ipv6---it-tekniker/?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=sv&_x_tr_pto=wapp> pts-se.translate.goog<https://pts-se.translate.goog/sv/bransch/internet/ipv6/dags-att-infora-ipv6/ipv6---it-tekniker/?_x_tr_sl=sv&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=sv&_x_tr_pto=wapp> I have deployed IPv6 or been involved in many municpalities and enterprise since many years and I may help you with a short guide. My own reflections over the years is - keep it simple - Don’t build the most advanced, complex and handsome address plan - It isn’t a long project, often it’s about a few days to be done - Always dual stack so the staff have some thing to refer or fall back to - Main problem isn’t the internal network, it’s broken IPv6 services outside where Happy Eyeball don’t help you In some cases I have had training for the staff when we activate IPv6 in some segments. /Tobbe -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS* -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
Hi Wilhelm Me being a network engineer in an enterprise and an IPv6 enthusiast can say, that it even fails within the IT. Many IT workers, from server administrators over network consultants to application / solution designers still ignore IPv6 as an avoidable burden. Every time I talk vendor for a new product, they wince when I ask for IPv6 support - even today. And IPv6 support doesn't mean that all aspects are covered. Even in the space of network vendors, you feel the difference of maturity for IPv6 related support compared to the IPv4 related aspects of the solution when you try to thoroughly set it up for IPv6. The same goes on when going towards application space. With these constraints it's hard to encourage our own IT folks to just roll it out.
From my opinion, without companies being forced from top-down with a language managers understand (money or complaints), the move to IPv6 will remain at the micro-steps enthusiasts like me can afford and support.
Alexander Koeppe This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other person. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any attachment from your system. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its subsidiaries do not accept liability for any omissions or errors in this message which may arise as a result of E-Mail-transmission or for damages resulting from any unauthorized changes of the content of this message and any attachment thereto. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its subsidiaries do not guarantee that this message is free of viruses and does not accept liability for any damages caused by any virus transmitted therewith. Click merckgroup.com/disclaimer<https://www.merckgroup.com/en/legal-disclaimer/mail-disclaimer.html> to access the German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Turkish, Polish and Slovak versions of this disclaimer. Please find our Privacy Statement information by clicking here: merckgroup.com/privacy-statements-by-location<https://www.merckgroup.com/en/privacy-statement/privacy-statements-by-location.html>
Hi Wilhelm, In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status. I would be happy to contribute to this effort. Best regards Paolo -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises Hi, at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6. We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples. I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me. Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter. Best, Wilhelm -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
Hi Wilhelm, Lot of things were said and all are correct. Lack of knowledge, budget, priority, interest, projects, success. It might be rather an approach for RIPE and other RIRs to get in contact with governmental units, setting up legislation as with the office of management and budget in the US: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf / "Completing the Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)" I believe that no government will successfully force companies by laws, but it'll be rather an idea to start with governmental department and public services first things. Submitting companies' annual financial statements, registering cars, health related information to public insurances via IPV6 only would massively help. But that's a long road. RIRs might help with consulting for free / small charge, but without governments and legislation, companies do what they're supposed to... earning revenue with minimum effort. If there's any request for support in a small working group, you can contact me for further discussions. -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg Sent: Mittwoch, 31. Mai 2023 08:42 To: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises Caution: This email originated from outside of the ALDI-HOFER organisation. If the content looks suspicious, please report this email via the "Phish Alert Report" button or the ServiceNow request "Report Security Event". Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender's email address and you are sure the content is safe. Hi Wilhelm, In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status. I would be happy to contribute to this effort. Best regards Paolo -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises Hi, at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6. We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples. I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me. Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter. Best, Wilhelm -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
Hi, On Tue, 30 May 2023 at 23:52, Springob, Andreas (IIT-CSS/Network & Identity Solutions) <andreas.springob@aldi-sued.com> wrote:
Hi Wilhelm,
Lot of things were said and all are correct. Lack of knowledge, budget, priority, interest, projects, success. It might be rather an approach for RIPE and other RIRs to get in contact with governmental units, setting up legislation as with the office of management and budget in the US:
The RIPE NCC has done this - and probably still does it. When I attended these meetings in the past there was pushback from civil servants. Governments often struggle to get more than two qualified vendors for many contracts. The civil servants were concerned that adding an IPv6 requirement would further reduce competition and make managing cost more difficult. Kind regards, Leo
Hi
The civil servants were concerned that adding an IPv6 requirement would further reduce competition and make managing cost more difficult.
And this is - in my opinion - just a reflection of the typical counter-argument coming from these IT consultants being reluctant getting their hands dirty with IPv6 and postulate "why should I need IPv6, everything works with IPv4 though". Alexander Koeppe This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other person. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the message and any attachment from your system. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its subsidiaries do not accept liability for any omissions or errors in this message which may arise as a result of E-Mail-transmission or for damages resulting from any unauthorized changes of the content of this message and any attachment thereto. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany and any of its subsidiaries do not guarantee that this message is free of viruses and does not accept liability for any damages caused by any virus transmitted therewith. Click merckgroup.com/disclaimer<https://www.merckgroup.com/en/legal-disclaimer/mail-disclaimer.html> to access the German, French, Spanish, Portuguese, Turkish, Polish and Slovak versions of this disclaimer. Please find our Privacy Statement information by clicking here: merckgroup.com/privacy-statements-by-location<https://www.merckgroup.com/en/privacy-statement/privacy-statements-by-location.html>
Hi Andreas, if the government starts shutting down services with IPv4, the pressure for IPv6 will rise :-) There are no laws needed. Best, Wilhelm Am 31.05.2023 um 08:52 schrieb Springob, Andreas (IIT-CSS/Network & Identity Solutions):
Hi Wilhelm,
Lot of things were said and all are correct. Lack of knowledge, budget, priority, interest, projects, success. It might be rather an approach for RIPE and other RIRs to get in contact with governmental units, setting up legislation as with the office of management and budget in the US: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf / "Completing the Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)"
I believe that no government will successfully force companies by laws, but it'll be rather an idea to start with governmental department and public services first things. Submitting companies' annual financial statements, registering cars, health related information to public insurances via IPV6 only would massively help. But that's a long road. RIRs might help with consulting for free / small charge, but without governments and legislation, companies do what they're supposed to... earning revenue with minimum effort.
If there's any request for support in a small working group, you can contact me for further discussions.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Best regards,
Andreas Springob
Senior IT Consultant
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*
IIT Corporate Shared Services - Network & Identity Solutions
Mintarder Straße 36-40
45481 Mülheim an der Ruhr
Germany
Tel: +49 208 2072-4072
* SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT*
/Diese Nachricht einschließlich Anlagen ist ausschließlich für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt und kann privilegierte, vertrauliche oder sonst geschützte Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht irrtümlich erhalten, sind Ihnen Kenntnisnahme, Vervielfältigung, Weiterleitung oder sonstige Verwertung ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie den oben angegebenen Absender und löschen Sie die empfangene Nachricht.
This message including the enclosures is intended exclusively for the recipient stated and can contain privileged, confidential or otherwise protected information. Should you receive this message by mistake, it is strictly prohibited for you to use, disseminate, forward, print or copy this message. Please inform the sender mentioned above and delete the message received. /
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*,Mintarder Straße 36-40,45481Mülheim an der Ruhr
Offene Handelsgesellschaft, eingetragen Amtsgericht Duisburg, HRA 8577
Geschäftsführende Gesellschafterin: ALDI International Services & Administration SE, Mülheim an der Ruhr ∙ Registergericht: Amtsgericht Duisburg · HRB 34355
Geschäftsführende Direktoren: Dr. David Godschalk, Daniel Koch, Reiner Mischke, Inka Rückle
Weitere Gesellschafter: ALDI SE & Co. Kommanditgesellschaften der Unternehmensgruppe ALDI SÜD
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg Sent: Mittwoch, 31. Mai 2023 08:42 To: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Caution: This email originated from outside of the ALDI-HOFER organisation. If the content looks suspicious, please report this email via the "Phish Alert Report" button or the ServiceNow request "Report Security Event". Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender's email address and you are sure the content is safe.
Hi Wilhelm,
In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status.
I would be happy to contribute to this effort.
Best regards Paolo
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi,
at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6.
We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs.
From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples.
I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me.
Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter.
Best,
Wilhelm
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
The government still relies on their Fax machines, so not sure if that is going to happen soon. But you have my support on shutting v4 services. :) On June 1, 2023 4:21:40 PM GMT+02:00, Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> wrote:
Hi Andreas,
if the government starts shutting down services with IPv4, the pressure for IPv6 will rise :-) There are no laws needed.
Best,
Wilhelm
Am 31.05.2023 um 08:52 schrieb Springob, Andreas (IIT-CSS/Network & Identity Solutions):
Hi Wilhelm,
Lot of things were said and all are correct. Lack of knowledge, budget, priority, interest, projects, success. It might be rather an approach for RIPE and other RIRs to get in contact with governmental units, setting up legislation as with the office of management and budget in the US: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf / "Completing the Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)"
I believe that no government will successfully force companies by laws, but it'll be rather an idea to start with governmental department and public services first things. Submitting companies' annual financial statements, registering cars, health related information to public insurances via IPV6 only would massively help. But that's a long road. RIRs might help with consulting for free / small charge, but without governments and legislation, companies do what they're supposed to... earning revenue with minimum effort.
If there's any request for support in a small working group, you can contact me for further discussions.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Best regards,
Andreas Springob
Senior IT Consultant
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*
IIT Corporate Shared Services - Network & Identity Solutions
Mintarder Straße 36-40
45481 Mülheim an der Ruhr
Germany
Tel: +49 208 2072-4072
* SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT*
/Diese Nachricht einschließlich Anlagen ist ausschließlich für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt und kann privilegierte, vertrauliche oder sonst geschützte Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht irrtümlich erhalten, sind Ihnen Kenntnisnahme, Vervielfältigung, Weiterleitung oder sonstige Verwertung ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie den oben angegebenen Absender und löschen Sie die empfangene Nachricht.
This message including the enclosures is intended exclusively for the recipient stated and can contain privileged, confidential or otherwise protected information. Should you receive this message by mistake, it is strictly prohibited for you to use, disseminate, forward, print or copy this message. Please inform the sender mentioned above and delete the message received. /
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*,Mintarder Straße 36-40,45481Mülheim an der Ruhr
Offene Handelsgesellschaft, eingetragen Amtsgericht Duisburg, HRA 8577
Geschäftsführende Gesellschafterin: ALDI International Services & Administration SE, Mülheim an der Ruhr ∙ Registergericht: Amtsgericht Duisburg · HRB 34355
Geschäftsführende Direktoren: Dr. David Godschalk, Daniel Koch, Reiner Mischke, Inka Rückle
Weitere Gesellschafter: ALDI SE & Co. Kommanditgesellschaften der Unternehmensgruppe ALDI SÜD
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg Sent: Mittwoch, 31. Mai 2023 08:42 To: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Caution: This email originated from outside of the ALDI-HOFER organisation. If the content looks suspicious, please report this email via the "Phish Alert Report" button or the ServiceNow request "Report Security Event". Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender's email address and you are sure the content is safe.
Hi Wilhelm,
In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status.
I would be happy to contribute to this effort.
Best regards Paolo
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi,
at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6.
We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs.
From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples.
I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me.
Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter.
Best,
Wilhelm
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Benedikt Merkl via ipv6-wg wrote on 01/06/2023 15:25:
The government still relies on their Fax machines, so not sure if that is going to happen soon. But you have my support on shutting v4 services. :)
Which government service would you suggest shutting down on ipv4? The online tax submission portal? Pension services? Nick
On 6/1/23 15:06, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Which government service would you suggest shutting down on ipv4?
I can't imagine any government to require anyone to support IPv6, one particular protocol, explicitly, and even less to require anyone to shut down still-working IPv4. If you can't even convince technical people to migrate, how will you get majorities in a Parliament for this? This is just not going to happen, hands down. Although it may be a good thing in this particular case, I think requiring usage of one particular technology by law (a protocol or something else) is dangerous. Imaginge they made a law that required companies to adopt IPv4 and shut down their X.25 or whatever they had before. Maybe it would have been nice to have such a law in the 80s and 90s, but what about today? It's hard enough to get rid of a protocol that's not required by law. Companies just need to _feel_ that IPv4 isn't going to get them very far anymore and that it's better to prepare for the future now because its better to have options rather than to need them when the time has come. -- Jordan A. Borgner
Hi, On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 11:15:51PM +0000, Jordan A. Borgner wrote:
Companies just need to _feel_ that IPv4 isn't going to get them very far anymore and that it's better to prepare for the future now because its better to have options rather than to need them when the time has come.
So how do we get there? I think we tried "preaching" for a very long time (did not work), "help with procurement policies so at least equipment vendors get the message" (did work to some extent), "mandating" (US Govt, but enterprises will only take note for those bits that they want to sell to the US Govt)... The market has tried "make IPv4 insanely expensive", and corporate mergers/acquisitions have tried "make IPv4 operationally very hard, with packets going through 3 NAT44 devices *inside* the corp network", and even that has failed to send the message "IPv4 has no future". So, what else can we do? Gert Doering -- IPv6 preacher man -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Gert Doering wrote on 03/06/2023 13:33:
So how do we get there?
We got where we are now because there are compelling reasons to deploy ipv4, but not compelling reasons to deploy ipv6. IPv4 is the stone that rolled down the hill; ipv6 is the stone that, 25 years later, people are still trying to roll up the hill. What's surprising is that some people are still surprised that ipv6 won't roll itself up the hill after 25 years of resolutely not doing this by itself.
So, what else can we do?
Supportive / constructive mandates level out the upwards slope on the ipv6 hill, a little. Destructive mandates - e.g. "governments should withdraw ipv4 services" - are more like suggestions to get out a digger and change the slope of the hill so that the boulder will roll up it. The only outcome from this sort of approach will be expense, a mixture of bemusement and rage from bystanders, and ultimate failure. Nick
Hi, On Sat, Jun 03, 2023 at 07:00:48PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Gert Doering wrote on 03/06/2023 13:33:
So how do we get there?
We got where we are now because there are compelling reasons to deploy ipv4, but not compelling reasons to deploy ipv6.
On "the wild Internet", I agree with you - we're not at the point yet where you can do fully without IPv4 (even if CGN'ed). Going back to the Subject: of this thread, inside sufficiently large Enterprise networks, the hidden costs of IPv4 (multiple layers of inside NAT44, lack of proper network visibility, much more complex debugging) are sufficiently high that at least *some* networks already felt compelled to go IPv6-only, in their internal networks. (Dual-stack is not very interesting on the inside) So - how do we send out this message, so it can be heard and understood? Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
On 6/3/23 12:33, Gert Doering wrote:
So, what else can we do?
At the end a number of factors that make up the big picture must play together to roll that stone up the hill, and all of them influence one another, at least a bit. Compatibility to other networks, amount of work to maintain the own network, demand on IPv6 products, better offers of IPv6 products etc, you called it. Making IPv4 expensive is one good step. An official renaming of IPv4 to "Legacy IP" or "IP Legacy", at least by the vendors, might be a good psychological trick. What's very important too is to get the application developers on board. Advances in the software that uses the network (and gives it its reason to exist) is a crucial factor I think. If there are technical benefits that can be achieved using IPv6 but not Legacy IP (too tired to think of some now), you may feel a difference between IPv6 and Legacy IP at some point and the latter may become outpaced. So developers need to be convinced too. And taught about it. -- Jordan A. Borgner
Hi, On Sun, Jun 04, 2023 at 08:16:58PM +0000, Jordan A. Borgner wrote:
What's very important too is to get the application developers on board. Advances in the software that uses the network (and gives it its reason to exist) is a crucial factor I think. If there are technical benefits that can be achieved using IPv6 but not Legacy IP (too tired to think of some now), you may feel a difference between IPv6 and Legacy IP at some point and the latter may become outpaced. So developers need to be convinced too. And taught about it.
Tried that. There is no "killer feature" in IPv6, it's just plumbing in a different colour. And, to an application developer, dual-stack is lots of extra hassles... so unless customers are making it a hard requirement (procurement guidelines), it's much easier to just not bother and stick to IPv4-only. (IPv6-only is similar to IPv4-only, but dual-stack, happy eyeballs, logging, filtering for v4 and v6, and all that is just extra nuisance) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
I know this is not quite what you mean, but there are IPv6 only government websites already. :) Such as https://clintonwhitehouse2.archives.gov --Dan On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 9:21 AM Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> wrote:
Hi Andreas,
if the government starts shutting down services with IPv4, the pressure for IPv6 will rise :-) There are no laws needed.
Best,
Wilhelm Am 31.05.2023 um 08:52 schrieb Springob, Andreas (IIT-CSS/Network & Identity Solutions):
Hi Wilhelm,
Lot of things were said and all are correct. Lack of knowledge, budget, priority, interest, projects, success. It might be rather an approach for RIPE and other RIRs to get in contact with governmental units, setting up legislation as with the office of management and budget in the US: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf / "Completing the Transition to Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)"
I believe that no government will successfully force companies by laws, but it'll be rather an idea to start with governmental department and public services first things. Submitting companies' annual financial statements, registering cars, health related information to public insurances via IPV6 only would massively help. But that's a long road. RIRs might help with consulting for free / small charge, but without governments and legislation, companies do what they're supposed to... earning revenue with minimum effort.
If there's any request for support in a small working group, you can contact me for further discussions.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Best regards,
Andreas Springob
Senior IT Consultant
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*
IIT Corporate Shared Services - Network & Identity Solutions
Mintarder Straße 36-40
45481 Mülheim an der Ruhr
Germany
Tel: +49 208 2072-4072 * SAVE PAPER - THINK BEFORE YOU PRINT*
*Diese Nachricht einschließlich Anlagen ist ausschließlich für den angegebenen Empfänger bestimmt und kann privilegierte, vertrauliche oder sonst geschützte Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese Nachricht irrtümlich erhalten, sind Ihnen Kenntnisnahme, Vervielfältigung, Weiterleitung oder sonstige Verwertung ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie den oben angegebenen Absender und löschen Sie die empfangene Nachricht. This message including the enclosures is intended exclusively for the recipient stated and can contain privileged, confidential or otherwise protected information. Should you receive this message by mistake, it is strictly prohibited for you to use, disseminate, forward, print or copy this message. Please inform the sender mentioned above and delete the message received. *
*ALDI International Services SE & Co. oHG*, Mintarder Straße 36-40, 45481 Mülheim an der Ruhr
Offene Handelsgesellschaft, eingetragen Amtsgericht Duisburg, HRA 8577
Geschäftsführende Gesellschafterin: ALDI International Services & Administration SE, Mülheim an der Ruhr ∙ Registergericht: Amtsgericht Duisburg · HRB 34355
Geschäftsführende Direktoren: Dr. David Godschalk, Daniel Koch, Reiner Mischke, Inka Rückle
Weitere Gesellschafter: ALDI SE & Co. Kommanditgesellschaften der Unternehmensgruppe ALDI SÜD
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg Sent: Mittwoch, 31. Mai 2023 08:42 To: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Caution: This email originated from outside of the ALDI-HOFER organisation. If the content looks suspicious, please report this email via the "Phish Alert Report" button or the ServiceNow request "Report Security Event". Do not click on any links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender's email address and you are sure the content is safe.
Hi Wilhelm,
In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status.
I would be happy to contribute to this effort.
Best regards Paolo
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi,
at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6.
We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs.
From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples.
I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me.
Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter.
Best,
Wilhelm
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
--
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
Hi, On 6/1/23 17:21, Wilhelm Boeddinghaus wrote:
Hi Andreas,
if the government starts shutting down services with IPv4, the pressure for IPv6 will rise :-) There are no laws needed. Many countries have some sort of equal access laws, that could be used to prevent shutting down IPv4 services.
My 2 cents, -- Aleksi Suhonen
Hi Paolo, thanks for your help with this project. Lack of budget is of course a problem. But if the IT departments could at least quantify the budget, this would help. If they have no idea how to start the project, a budget eastimation is not possible. Best, Wilhelm Am 31.05.2023 um 08:42 schrieb Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg:
Hi Wilhelm,
In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status.
I would be happy to contribute to this effort.
Best regards Paolo
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi,
at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6.
We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs.
From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples.
I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me.
Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter.
Best,
Wilhelm
Hi Wilhelm, All, I have noticed that some people would be happy to cooperate to your idea of a paper for IPv6 in enterprises (me included :-) Wonder if you have thought of any rough plan to start and organize the work. Many thanks Paolo -----Original Message----- From: Wilhelm Boeddinghaus <wilhelm@boeddinghaus.de> Sent: Thursday, June 1, 2023 4:20 PM To: Paolo Volpato <paolo.volpato@huawei.com> Cc: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: Re: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises Hi Paolo, thanks for your help with this project. Lack of budget is of course a problem. But if the IT departments could at least quantify the budget, this would help. If they have no idea how to start the project, a budget eastimation is not possible. Best, Wilhelm Am 31.05.2023 um 08:42 schrieb Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg:
Hi Wilhelm,
In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status.
I would be happy to contribute to this effort.
Best regards Paolo
-----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises
Hi,
at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6.
We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs.
From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples.
I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me.
Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter.
Best,
Wilhelm
Hello all, Resurrecting an old thread to share some experience when trying to start deploying ipv6 on a small London based ISP. As a start we are deploying in a test location which is setup as a "site". We have a /29 allocated and that's been divided into /32 for each site. Which is again divided into /35 for various functions in the NOC including for servers (DNS, Speed Test etc), subscriber allocation (/64 and a /56 per subscriber), loopback address etc. There is sufficient guidelines and documentation to reach till this point. But from here on, it's pretty dark. Some of the question for which we have no clear guidelines are: 1. How will we assign address to routers? Like will we should be assigning 2001:db8:2000::1/35 or 2001:db8:2000::1/64 for router interface? 2. How will we be assigning static address to (DNS?) servers? 2.1 One IP from /35? 2.2 An IP from the /64 assigned to router interface? 2.3 An IP from a different /64 but from same /35? In the case of 2.3 will the routing work? We have three interfaces in the router with one facing upstream and is using a /127 assigned by the up stream provider, of the other two one iface is for servers and another for BNGs. How are ipv6 address allocated in these interfaces. There are not much (atleast not to my google fu) resources addressing these nuts and bolts configuration information. I am writing this to share a from the trenches perspective to this discussion Thanks X. ------- Original Message ------- On Wednesday, June 14th, 2023 at 9:38 PM, Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg@ripe.net> wrote:
Hi Wilhelm, All,
I have noticed that some people would be happy to cooperate to your idea of a paper for IPv6 in enterprises (me included :-) Wonder if you have thought of any rough plan to start and organize the work.
Many thanks Paolo
Xuo Guoto via ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg@ripe.net> wrote: > 1. How will we assign address to routers? Like will we should be > assigning 2001:db8:2000::1/35 or 2001:db8:2000::1/64 for router No. Each router needs a /128 as a loopback address to use. I assign them all from a single /64 for that purpose. The /128s go into the your IGP. Many of your p2p ethernet links between sites/routers might not need prefixes at all. > interface? 2. How will we be assigning static address to (DNS?) > servers? I don't understand the question. > 2.1 One IP from /35? 2.2 An IP from the /64 assigned to No. Why would you be throwing /35s around? If your DNS servers participate in IGP, then a /128 on a loopback interface, assuming they have multiple interfaces works. Otherwise a static allocation from the /64 that the routers provide. > We have three interfaces in the router with one facing upstream and is > using a /127 assigned by the up stream provider, of the other two one > iface is for servers and another for BNGs. How are ipv6 address > allocated in these interfaces. Statically? -- Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- *I*LIKE*TRAINS*
Thanks for your input Michael. The vagueness of the problem description reflects my own confusion. We are not using IGP as of now, its a small NOC with a couple of devices. ------- Original Message ------- On Monday, July 31st, 2023 at 12:38 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
Each router needs a /128 as a loopback address to use. I assign them all from a single /64 for that purpose.
Ok.
Many of your p2p ethernet links between sites/routers might not need prefixes at all.
This is not clear.
2. How will we be assigning static address to (DNS?) servers?
I don't understand the question.
My question was that I have a /35 (say 2001:db8:2000::/35), and a router with three interfaces, one a p2p link with upstream, rest two interfaces are connected to two different segments as shown below: │ ┌─────────┴───────┐ │ │ │ Router │ │ │ └────┬───────┬────┘ A │ │ B ┌─────────┘ └───────────┐ │ │ ┌─────────┴───┐ ┌───────┴──────┐ │ C D │ E │ F│ ┌───┴────┐ ┌──────┴──┐ ┌──┴─┐ ┌──┴─┐ │ dns1 │ │ mail1 │ │ S1│ │S2 │ └────────┘ └─────────┘ └────┘ └────┘ In the diagram above what will be the ip address at points A to F? C-F are servers and need static ip address.
Otherwise a static allocation from the /64 that the routers provide.
Can you please elaborate this? Thanks for your patience and time. I hope the questions I am having will be shared by many and will be addressed in the guidelines when published! X.
Hi,
We are not using IGP as of now, its a small NOC with a couple of devices.
I would strongly suggest using an IGP (probably OSPF) even in a small setup. It will allow you much greater flexibility and redundancy with very little effort. See if you can find a friendly local person in your local Network Operators Group (NOG) to help you a bit. NOGs are a great place for those looking to learn. And otherwise feel free to contact me off-list. I’ll happily get you started. Cheers! Sander
On 31 Jul 2023 at 11:19:29, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
See if you can find a friendly local person in your local Network Operators Group (NOG) to help you a bit. NOGs are a great place for those looking to learn. And otherwise feel free to contact me off-list. I’ll happily get you started.
UKNOF and NetLDN would be good places to start. https://uknof.uk/ https://netldn.uk/ f
Thanks every one for suggestions. I found one more resource which is more in tune with what I was looking for: https://blog.apnic.net/2023/04/04/ipv6-architecture-and-subnetting-guide-for... X. Sent with [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/) secure email. ------- Original Message ------- On Monday, July 31st, 2023 at 9:31 PM, Fearghas Mckay <fearghas@gmail.com> wrote:
On 31 Jul 2023 at 11:19:29, Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> wrote:
See if you can find a friendly local person in your local Network Operators Group (NOG) to help you a bit. NOGs are a great place for those looking to learn. And otherwise feel free to contact me off-list. I’ll happily get you started.
UKNOF and NetLDN would be good places to start.
f
Willing to contribute here also. As many stated. IPv6 is mostly seen as costs now, together with not all people knowledgeable enough. Practical examples might help loads of businesses. Personally I've developed many scripts for our company and similar companies to be able to setup dual-stack (or ipv6-only) properly. Robin Op 31 mei 2023 08:42 schreef Paolo Volpato via ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg@ripe.net>: Hi Wilhelm, In addition, I would add that they also lack the budget to consider deploying IPv6, meaning that enterprises don't consider IPv6 as a priority. At least, this is what we found during the editing of RFC 9386 on IPv6 deployment status. I would be happy to contribute to this effort. Best regards Paolo -----Original Message----- From: ipv6-wg <ipv6-wg-bounces@ripe.net> On Behalf Of Wilhelm Boeddinghaus Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 6:06 PM To: ipv6-wg@ripe.net Subject: [ipv6-wg] Clear Guidance for Enterprises Hi, at the end of my talk during the RIPE86 IPv6 working group I promised to start work on a paper with clear guidance for enterprises to migrate their networks to IPv6. We have often wondere why enterprises do not migrate to IPv6. One possible answer is: They have no time and they lack knowledge. Many IT departments don't have any spare time for reading RFCs. From my understanding these IT departments don't need papers explaining the many possibilites to choose from. They need very clear guidance and examples. I am looking for 3 to 4 people who would like to start working on this with me. Peter Hessler contacted me during the meeting and he offered his help, time and expertise for this project. Thank you, Peter. Best, Wilhelm -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg -- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
They have no time and they lack knowledge Well, they seem to have the time to learn about and invest in complicated and outdated NAT solutions in order to stretch what little IPv4 they have. Let's produce some IPv6-only (with some proper
On 5/30/23 19:06, Wilhelm Boeddinghaus wrote: transition tech at the edges) guides for them. Now that's something I would totally get behind :) Regards, Yannis
participants (18)
-
Aleksi Suhonen -
Alexander Koeppe -
Benedikt Merkl -
Dan Oachs -
Fearghas Mckay -
Gert Doering -
Jordan A. Borgner -
Leo Vegoda -
Michael Richardson -
Nick Hilliard -
Paolo Volpato -
Robin Flikkema -
Sander Steffann -
Springob, Andreas (IIT-CSS/Network & Identity Solutions) -
Torbjörn Eklöv -
Wilhelm Boeddinghaus -
Xuo Guoto -
Yannis Nikolopoulos