Re: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> Mon, 17 July 2017 08:18 UTC

Return-Path: <prvs=13714351ed=jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C28FA131945 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 01:18:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=consulintel.es; domainkeys=pass (1024-bit key) header.from=jordi.palet@consulintel.es header.d=consulintel.es
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 MQ2Lb_9j82IA for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 01:18:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.consulintel.es (mail.consulintel.es [217.126.185.215]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF7F1131798 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 01:17:59 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1500279471; x=1500884271; q=dns/txt; h=DomainKey-Signature: Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To:CC:Message-ID: Thread-Topic:References:In-Reply-To:Mime-version:Content-type: Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; bh=ygJ1JtMfexKdiI570kxL4/eST blnDVPzkIM2IZlt5TA=; b=t6w3DXNkxwWbKbMB4Q5h+deQMbk1/UgJKmtm/JoI+ wYlXe9RF/8VN6sokufhzTEgiSieRxYG+xk2lZVG5/GVYALkA6vXEuqHitw4QLTeU U8dLKE5qew+RNxWfF+Y132qCNTg+IAoay7KcYC/JsvVR1wXiJqOH+vJrk/R7eCVH xQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=AXwanPRVwgk4sVRNjR9BQF1D4UW/LS9wBQe/1yV6mvRjUPHvqPHzzBTRfkWA SzEwhxUo1TgouLVVr/OuEYcgA7urOCihoLoPHfjuXxbqs02uJD8writEu 9pay4di4GkP4Yo056qiACIeL/bN+5VnUwLt2ghDvTHHGr9bzMTVVxE=;
X-MDAV-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:17:51 +0200
X-Spam-Processed: mail.consulintel.es, Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:17:50 +0200
Received: from [31.133.142.45] by mail.consulintel.es (MDaemon PRO v11.0.3) with ESMTP id md50005478167.msg for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:17:49 +0200
X-MDOP-RefID: re=0.000,fgs=0 (_st=1 _vt=0 _iwf=0)
X-Authenticated-Sender: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-HashCash: 1:20:170717:md50005478167::hMQSBl66XNipac5+:00006e/C
X-MDRemoteIP: 31.133.142.45
X-Return-Path: prvs=13714351ed=jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-Envelope-From: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: v6ops@ietf.org
User-Agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.24.0.170702
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 10:17:45 +0200
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
To: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>
CC: Jim Martin <jim@daedelus.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42188852-BBEB-4D75-967F-4BED79BBBCAE@consulintel.es>
Thread-Topic: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings
References: <7643C1DC-76A3-4652-9BB1-D0D42801F37E@consulintel.es> <CAEqgTWYOe=jWp=zVZNLx6DjKjNpPTYaq2jmjryudrGZHKZNq6g@mail.gmail.com> <A5D0385C-F755-4B44-86D8-6E618E77193F@consulintel.es> <CAPt1N1kroh2cPkTr8HRfNjLTdG0hkC1oQsUZdhQzQA5tA9-xug@mail.gmail.com> <9AF791E9-1E12-425E-93A4-2913E2D18CBA@consulintel.es> <CAPt1N1kU4cpVCsp7W3XNAZupYqjTWVH+BNp9bwtznnWD_uP2oQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAEqgTWZzZW0wKggDXjY=-aMfDxzd5-GoRqju1829XwY3aHQuYg@mail.gmail.com> <0FAF1E05-DA4B-47BF-95F7-7EFCD1BED9B0@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <0FAF1E05-DA4B-47BF-95F7-7EFCD1BED9B0@cable.comcast.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Reply-To: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/m0lzcux-Opeob4FVOQwzVtk4064>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 08:18:02 -0000

However, we have different ways for doing the same, and we should go for the one that has less impact and it is more realistic.

In the real world, you will not disable IPv4 in the LANs of end-users or enterprise customers (at least not now, may be in 3-5 years from now). This is what IETF need to test now. IPv6 only with IPv4 as a service (which is 464XLAT).

Again, and I’m for-IPv6, but being realistic, not considering sci-fi of turning down IPv4 in our customer networks (now).

Regards,
Jordi
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> en nombre de "Brzozowski, John" <John_Brzozowski@comcast.com>
Responder a: <John_Brzozowski@comcast.com>
Fecha: lunes, 17 de julio de 2017, 10:14
Para: Noah <noah@neo.co.tz>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
CC: Jim Martin <jim@daedelus.com>, IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
Asunto: Re: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings

    Agree with Noah and Ted.
     
    Note the I-D explicitly documents that a fallback, dual stack SSID must remain available as Noah mentions below.
     
    I fail to see how doing this will harm or discriminate.
     
    We do need to eat our own dogfood, otherwise we are hypocrites.
     
    John
    
    +1-484-962-0060
     
    From:
    v6ops <v6ops-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Noah <noah@neo.co.tz>
    Date: Monday, July 17, 2017 at 09:01
    To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
    Cc: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, v6ops <v6ops@ietf.org>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Jim Martin <jim@daedelus.com>, Suresh Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>
    Subject: Re: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings
    
     
    
    FWIW and to cater for all, would a fallback dual stack SSID work for the status quo while this 2nd v6 SSID is also experimented upon which is a great idea considering this is IETF.
    
     
    
    Noah
    
    
     
    On 17 Jul 2017 9:54 a.m., "Ted Lemon" <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
    
    I don't think this is a social justice issue.   Does the IETF think that IPv6 works, or not?   If we think it works, and we have been working for what, 20 years, to make it work, and we have designed all this great
     transition tech, then why on earth would we not want to use it?   This isn't "one draft."   This is roughly half the work of the IETF for the past two decades.
    
     
    On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 8:51 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es> wrote:
    
    So we agree to change the rules so that we use this network for every ID that want to experiment with it? Otherwise we discriminate among different authors …
    
    I think is a really bad precedent.
    
    Regards,
    Jordi
    
    
    -----Mensaje original-----
    De: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
    Responder a: <mellon@fugue.com>
    Fecha: lunes, 17 de julio de 2017, 8:48
    Para: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>
    CC: IPv6 Ops WG <v6ops@ietf.org>, Jim Martin <jim@daedelus.com>, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Suresh
     Krishnan <suresh.krishnan@gmail.com>, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
    Asunto: Re: [v6ops] Incremental Deployment of IPv6-only Wi-Fi for IETF Meetings
    
        I don't actually know what the goal of the IETF network is other than to provide connectivity.   Because of the vicissitudes of hotel topology, it is often the case that IETF participants experience issues with the
     network at least once or twice per IETF despite the best efforts (and they are quite exceptional) of the NOC team.   I do not really see what the damage is that you are hoping to protect against here.   Users who don't read the NOC announcement?   No sympathy. 
      Sorry.
    
    
    
    
    
    **********************************************
    IPv4 is over
    Are you ready for the new Internet ?
    http://www.consulintel.es
    The IPv6 Company
    
    This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
     use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    
    
    
    
    
     
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    v6ops mailing list
    v6ops@ietf.org
    https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.