fred | 4 Jul 13:47 2015
Picon

new draft: draft-bao-v6ops-rfc6145bis

A new draft has been posted, at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bao-v6ops-rfc6145bis. Please take a
look at it and comment.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

joel jaeggli | 29 Jun 19:48 2015

OPS working groups, getting to be that time again.

We're 20 days out from IETF 93.

If you find yourself wanting to meet with me prior to that or you have
anything that needs special handling in the interim please let me know.

Draft submission deadline and initial agenda deadline both come due on
Monday 7/6.

Thanks and see you at IETF 93.
Joel

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
fred | 2 Jul 13:47 2015
Picon

new draft: draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops

A new draft has been posted, at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops. Please take a look at it and comment.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

Fernando Gont | 1 Jul 22:35 2015

Operational Implications of IPv6 Packets with Extension (Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-00.txt)

Folks,

A group of us published a new I-D trying to summarize the operational
and security implications. It is meant to summarize the reasons for
which operators may intentionally drop IPv6 packets containing IPv6
extension headers.

The I-D is available at:
<https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-00.txt>

As far as this I-D is concerned, think of us co-authors as the
messengers. The I-D doesn't argue itself whether you should (or should
not) drop packets with EHs, but simply discusses the challenge they
represent in some scenarios.

Comments will be more than welcome.

Thanks!

Best regards,
Fernando

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-gont-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-packet-drops-00.txt
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 13:29:21 -0700
From: internet-drafts@...
To: Gert Doering <gert@...>, Nick Hilliard <nick@...>,
Shucheng LIU (Will) <liushucheng@...>, Gert Doering
<gert@...>, Warren Kumari
(Continue reading)

internet | 28 Jun 21:50 2015
Picon

I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-03.txt


A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : Close encounters of the ICMP type 2 kind (near misses with ICMPv6 PTB)
        Authors         : Matt Byerly
                          Matt Hite
                          Joel Jaeggli
	Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-03.txt
	Pages           : 8
	Date            : 2015-06-28

Abstract:
   This document calls attention to the problem of delivering ICMPv6
   type 2 "Packet Too Big" (PTB) messages to the intended destination in
   ECMP load balanced or anycast network architectures.  It discusses
   operational mitigations that can be employed to address this class of
   failures.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-v6ops-pmtud-ecmp-problem-03

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
(Continue reading)

internet | 28 Jun 15:11 2015
Picon

I-D Action: draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc-01.txt


A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the IPv6 Operations Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : SIIT-DC: Stateless IP/ICMP Translation for IPv6 Data Centre Environments
        Author          : Tore Anderson
	Filename        : draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc-01.txt
	Pages           : 23
	Date            : 2015-06-28

Abstract:
   This document describes the use of the Stateless IP/ICMP Translation
   (SIIT) algorithm in an IPv6 Internet Data Centre (IDC).  In this
   deployment model, traffic from legacy IPv4-only clients on the
   Internet is translated to IPv6 when reaches the IDC operator's
   network infrastructure.  From that point on, it is treated just as if
   it was traffic from any other IPv6-capable end user.  This
   facilitates a single-stack IPv6-only network infrastructure, as well
   as efficient utilisation of public IPv4 addresses.

   The primary audience is IDC operators who are deploying IPv6, running
   out of available IPv4 addresses, and/or feel that dual stack causes
   undesirable operational complexity.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc-01

(Continue reading)

fred | 27 Jun 13:47 2015
Picon

new draft: draft-vyncke-v6ops-ipv6-only-thin-clients

A new draft has been posted, at
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vyncke-v6ops-ipv6-only-thin-clients. Please take a look at it
and comment.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops

Fred Baker (fred | 27 Jun 03:08 2015
Picon

Fwd: v6ops - Requested sessions have been scheduled for IETF 93

FYI - timing for the joint meeting between v6ops and sunset4.

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" <agenda@...>
> Subject: v6ops - Requested sessions have been scheduled for IETF 93
> Date: June 26, 2015 at 4:55:10 PM PDT
> To: <fred.baker@...>
> Cc: <v6ops-ads@...>,
<lee@...>, <fred.baker@...>
> 
> Dear Fred Baker,
> 
> The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled.
> Below is the scheduled session information followed by
> the original request.
> 
> v6ops Session 1 (2:00:00)
>    Friday, Morning Session I 0900-1130
>    Room Name: Grand Hilton Ballroom size: 300
>    ---------------------------------------------
>    v6ops Session 2 (2:00:00)
>    Tuesday, Afternoon Session I 1300-1500
>    Room Name: Congress Hall II size: 400
>    ---------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Special Note: Joint Session with SUNSET4
> 
> 
(Continue reading)

Fred Baker (fred | 25 Jun 15:04 2015
Picon

Joint meeting of sunset4 and v6ops

The chairs of sunset4 and v6ops have been discussing our work plans, and feel it would be useful to meet
jointly at IETF 93. I have just posted a preliminary agenda, for working group comment, at https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/agenda/agenda-93-v6ops.

That agenda basically breaks two 2-hour slots into four one-hour slots. One such slot will be used by each
working group to discuss documents currently on the table, which are a total of five documents - two in
sunset4 and three in v6ops. We would like to invite two or three European ISPs to discuss their IPv6
deployments (which we have not lined up - any volunteers?), and we would like to spend an hour on charter discussions.

At this point, neither v6ops nor sunset4 have new drafts. I am expecting a respin of
draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc and draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-dc-2xlat, which we should finalize at this
meeting, and I am expecting a respin of draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv6-ehs-in-real-world responding to the
"next steps" thread of May 6-7. If new drafts come in for v6ops, we will likely either find a way for a
different working group to look at them (one draft I have heard proposed probably belongs in 6man),
discuss them if we have time, or discuss on-list for the present.
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
james woodyatt | 23 Jun 01:18 2015

Re: Happy eyeballs suggestions, was: Re: Apple and IPv6, a few clarifications

On Jun 22, 2015, at 15:57, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch <at> muada.com> wrote:
> On 23 Jun 2015, at 0:42, james woodyatt <jhw <at> nestlabs.com> wrote:
> 
>> I think you might have overlooked where I wrote “UDP” above instead of “TCP” which on iOS and OS X
doesn’t have any PMTUD support. The kernel will not do any fragmentation or retransmission of UDP packets.
> 
> No, I didn't overlook that part. But let me return the favor: I think you're confusing IPv6 with IPv4 here.
In IPv6, fragmentation is an IP-level function on the host.

I’m not confused about that.

> As such: […] I'm 99.9% sure this works the same way for UDP as for ICMPv6; […]

It does.

> You're right about the retransmission part, though, the first packet (the one that triggers the too big)
is lost. If the return packet (for the retransmission) is also large, that one will very likely also be lost
and cause the too big in the other direction, so it takes two retransmissions to get a reply.

The problem is that you can send those 1500 octet packets out your Wi-fi, and the NAT64 will shorten them to
1480 when it replaces the IPv6 header with an IPv4 header. Those 1480-octet IPv4 packets will then pass
straight through parts of the network with PMTU=1492 without generating errors and therefore never
exercising any application layer logic needed to deal with UDP-PMTUD, which is typically not there at all
because developers are… well, they often don’t do it. Hence, you have something that works on NAT64
that will fail when they encounter native IPv6 and PMTU=1492, which is as we all know, not as uncommon as
we’d like it to be.

—james
_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
(Continue reading)

fred | 21 Jun 20:00 2015
Picon

draft-ietf-v6ops-siit-eam WGLC

The working group last call for this draft announced last week
continues for another week.  Please feel free to comment on it.

_______________________________________________
v6ops mailing list
v6ops@...
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops


Gmane