IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IPv4 outage at next IETF in Chicago

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> Wed, 25 January 2017 08:53 UTC

Return-Path: <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 280BC129889 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1jA8DHxpSNd0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-x22e.google.com (mail-wm0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::22e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 884F8129864 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wm0-x22e.google.com with SMTP id r144so18285592wme.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to; bh=/BctXK3HFUm5DrNT5kPfprUuHl9HJkD5OeCsqLBDRiU=; b=N0XsS3/qL7DeguXtuWb/NdhanpyFKTuZToRsnwQE9wyzDOvhxA/7efdZQkO+h3bZ81 KX4xZmniMUWL/7lYTDrIjZiJEjnJuSQcyJVUear1dqz3E4isJwapOVN2oxt3+1NWvVCE 5klEXupOVPGv4mVbolklhr0ZlsOuwflnuccMGBo8PxG6auY7e0cskvxEFBooqGXcivt8 NwYiN5eH27kwN3jHwwUmqKBfGjDuaA4WpLyeeyJSiYu46MakS7+1u482Kpt1qfOuktvN VaBaaIMGq/M7pUGK5Ykvxme4PDYfgoui4rRycIJoNHqCam6rJFuoveG90S7bL1aN2B7k /j0g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=/BctXK3HFUm5DrNT5kPfprUuHl9HJkD5OeCsqLBDRiU=; b=lbvsr+vZoy4X6V95nw8IP7hrUm3+dh5M+6b7S4pACjTmR/qIU7f38Y87I3t7oatydk vceNrUwws/ER+BRp9lYcBSm12HC1GfM62xHftntpt3p8uQRj6jA2Akup4sCaxMzklbVS 6cOrtQu+gAgGNTb2QeCYdQ8QtnoC5hvVQrbr+xP4VuijyU2WUNNQkU155NLHDuuMJUcQ YaEbohY4TNqq+b/NrO0jh8/8b+1L/tY0G9Q9JDn1a69KOxXOcNDkBekCfXY8qC1Twhx3 Sn9+sHMpQy/rB9zEStzy2KLnmdLCiqJSdyEFOVcHbM/+sEpMNI4SwDFjM3oH6vlM0h9/ nCQg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIoypm7nqjTjFe27wWjrUCHhbNSNaIJGUVUR9hzk55Zy1Gdd62/SKIzlMGZ+deXpg==
X-Received: by 10.28.24.5 with SMTP id 5mr20827590wmy.1.1485334428795; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.126] (host213-123-124-182.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [213.123.124.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s26sm23793965wra.26.2017.01.25.00.53.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 00:53:48 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: IPv4 outage at next IETF in Chicago
To: Franck Martin <franck@peachymango.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <844840869.114000858.1485299485194.JavaMail.zimbra@peachymango.org>
From: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fc6770df-850b-a4b4-de00-f20cc69b4944@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:53:44 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <844840869.114000858.1485299485194.JavaMail.zimbra@peachymango.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------2A769B272255D418D08313A4"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/2WOef_UEmiDIAmhxC-BSNR8ASdM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:53:52 -0000


On 24/01/2017 23:11, Franck Martin wrote:
> I think it is time to move to the next level of IPv6 deployment.
>
> Ideally the IETF WiFi network should now only provide the following 2 
> networks:
> 1)IPv6-only
> 2)IPv6-only with NAT64
>
> The later should be the default network.
>
> However you would say, well some stuff will break, some non technical 
> people will use the IETF network and may have a bad experience, etc...
>
> So to be conservative but at the same time futurist and like it was 
> done a few years back, why not create again an IPv4 outage of a few 
> hours where the above 2 networks would be the only networks available?
>
> Depending on results, this outage could be expanded to a full day at 
> the following meeting, until the IPv4 network is totally removed from 
> the WiFi?

How about those that designed IPv6 and their ADs subject themselves to 
this regime and report to the rest of us how they got on?

- Stewart

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email