From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 19 07:40:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA12253>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:42 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA12247>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:41 -0800
Received: from zen.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA21971>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:40 -0800
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:42 -0800
From: postel@ISI.EDU
Posted-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:42 -0800
Message-Id: <199603192340.AA10932@zen.isi.edu>
Received: by zen.isi.edu (5.65c/4.0.3-4)
	id <AA10932>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 15:40:42 -0800
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: test 1
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Hello.

--jon.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 19 08:06:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13533>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:06:01 -0800
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13524>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:06:00 -0800
Message-Id: <199603200006.AA13524@zephyr.isi.edu>
To: 6bone
Subject: Test 1
Reply-To: kemp@isi.edu
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 16:06:00 PST
From: Joe Kemp <kemp@ISI.EDU>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO





This is a test....

--JK

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 19 08:07:43 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13710>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:07:44 -0800
Received: from zephyr.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13703>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:07:43 -0800
Message-Id: <199603200007.AA13703@zephyr.isi.edu>
To: 6bone
Subject: test 2
Reply-To: carlton@isi.edu
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 16:07:43 PST
From: Mike Carlton <carlton@ISI.EDU>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


test 2

cheers,
--mike


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 19 08:45:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA15665>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:45:41 -0800
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA15659>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:45:40 -0800
Received: from bat.isi.edu by darkstar.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA26068>; Tue, 19 Mar 1996 16:45:40 -0800
Message-Id: <199603200045.AA26068@darkstar.isi.edu>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Welcome to the 6bone mailing list
Reply-To: carlton@isi.edu
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 96 16:45:39 PST
From: Mike Carlton <carlton@ISI.EDU>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


The 6bone mailing list is now up and running; you have already been
added to it.  Currently the list is open, i.e. anyone may join;
however only people on the list may send mail to the list.

To send mail to the list, send it to <6bone@isi.edu>.  

If you experience any problems with the list, please let me know and
I'll make sure they get resolved.  I apologize for the delay in
getting this up; I think we have the kinks worked out now.

If you want to unsubscribe, send a message to <majordomo@isi.edu> 
with the line
        unsubscribe 6bone
as the contents of the message.  Some other useful commands that majordomo
understands are 'help', 'info 6bone' and 'who 6bone'.

cheers,
--mike carlton@isi.edu


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Mar 24 08:59:55 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16574>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:06:17 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16568>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:06:16 -0800
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA04172>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:06:14 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA31508; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 13:59:57 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA20741; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 13:59:56 -0500
Message-Id: <9603241859.AA20741@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: carlton@ISI.EDU
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Welcome to the 6bone mailing list 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 19 Mar 96 16:45:39 PST."
             <199603200045.AA26068@darkstar.isi.edu> 
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 96 13:59:55 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Thanks Mike I will send message out shortly.

p.s. Mike Collins can you send me privately your email addr thanks..

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Mar 24 09:27:41 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16777>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:34:53 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16771>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:34:52 -0800
Received: from mail11.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA04965>; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 11:34:51 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail11.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA03675; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:27:46 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA24685; Sun, 24 Mar 1996 14:27:42 -0500
Message-Id: <9603241927.AA24685@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Objective / Tasks / Next Steps .....
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 96 14:27:41 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi,

Sorry I am a bit late.  Day job is getting very IPv6 intensive for me.

Per our meeting at the IETF L.A. meeting.  This is a draft and can we
have some discussion.  

Once we get this past a draft stage we can send out to folks to enhance
our mail list and to the IPv6 implementors list.

Can we get a volunteer to write up the charter of the 6Bone ?????

    **************  DRAFT 6Bone *******************

Objective:

   To establish an Internet 6Bone network to foster the development
   and communications of IPv6.  The model will be based from the 
   experience based on the Mbone.

   Three initial core geographic areas will be established with focused 
   DRIs:
    - Asia (Jun Murai - via WIDE)
    - U.S. (ISI seems to be the right place Mike Carlton ??)
    - Europe (Brian Carpenter to suggest names.  This is done Brian
              sent me some names I will contact.)

   These DRIs would coordinate the 6Bone effort in each geography and
   verify persons or entities would log their participation on the 
   6Bone.
  
   Name - Two different names suggested:

      Globabl IPv6 Infrastructure (GII).. Not politically good.  But
      this is the one I gave Jun for his Miti proposal for now.

      Information IPv6 Infrastructure (or I-Cubed)....

      Can we resolve this now ?????

   Hardware/Software:

      Initially use existing IPv6 implementors to get started and
      existing IPv6 Tunnel networks today.

      We need to get a commit from vendors to donate or provide at
      a reduced cost Hardware and Software for IPv6 Hosts and Routers.

      Need solid spec for RIPv6 to get the initial routing underway.
      A public domain RIPv6 would be nice ????

      Jun Murai will attempt funding to set up IPv6 first in WIDE
      and then in Asia.  

      ES-NET and WIDE may be able to connect via same T1 link in
      SanFrancisco provider.

      Need a list of public domain software pointers.

      Need a WEB page or added words to IPng page.

      Need to have White Board/VAT running on IPv6.

   Network Topology:
  
      Need to define IPv6 legs and tunnels in each geography so
      we can get an idea of how this can work.  
   
Tasks:

  1.  Select a name. (This List)
  2.  6bone Charter and Announcment (Volunteer Needed ???)
  3.  Asia Logistics (Jun Murai In Process)
  4.  U.S. Logistics (Mike Carlton Need to know if ISI can take this on)
  5.  European Logistics (Brian Carpenter/Jim Bound In Process)
  6.  Network Topology of 6Bone INIT (This list working with geography
                                      contacts)
       o  Links between Asia-U.S. / Europe-U.S.
       o  DNS Root Name Servers and Secondaries
       o  IPv6 Routing Legs
       o  Required Software for Legs and Tunnels 
  7.  Determine use and applicaitons for 6bone (This list)
  8.  Message to IPv6 Implementors, ISPs, NAPs, etc.. (This list 
          but above tasks should be pretty much complete).

What else do we need to discuss or add to the above?

thanks
/jim
       

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Mar 25 15:13:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA27653>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:13:37 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA27647>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:13:34 -0800
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA29641>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:13:29 -0800
Received: from dxcoms.cern.ch by dxmint.cern.ch
	id AA19328; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 14:13:24 +0100
Received: by dxcoms.cern.ch; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/28Jul95-0949AM)
	id AA12541; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 14:13:22 +0100
Message-Id: <9603251313.AA12541@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Objective / Tasks / Next Steps .....
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 1996 14:13:22 +0100 (MET)
From: "Brian Carpenter   CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9603241927.AA24685@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> from "bound@zk3.dec.com" at Mar 24, 96 02:27:41 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 365
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>   
>    Name - Two different names suggested:
> 
>       Globabl IPv6 Infrastructure (GII).. Not politically good.  But
>       this is the one I gave Jun for his Miti proposal for now.
> 
>       Information IPv6 Infrastructure (or I-Cubed)....
> 

I suggest "GI6" as a compromise - it has the "G" for Global,
the "I" for everything, and "6" for luck.

   Brian

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Mar 25 03:51:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA28049>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:58:32 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA28043>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:58:29 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AB00378>; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 05:58:28 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA24465; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 08:51:01 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA28322; Mon, 25 Mar 1996 08:51:01 -0500
Message-Id: <9603251351.AA28322@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: "Brian Carpenter CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Objective / Tasks / Next Steps ..... 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 25 Mar 96 14:13:22 +0100."
             <9603251313.AA12541@dxcoms.cern.ch> 
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 96 08:51:00 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


>>    Name - Two different names suggested:
>> 
>>       Globabl IPv6 Infrastructure (GII).. Not politically good.  But
>>       this is the one I gave Jun for his Miti proposal for now.
>> 
>>       Information IPv6 Infrastructure (or I-Cubed)....
>> 
>
>I suggest "GI6" as a compromise - it has the "G" for Global,
>the "I" for everything, and "6" for luck.

Brian, good compromise.  I like it.  Others ????  I really like having
the "6" in it most of all.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 26 01:17:57 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA03824>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:16:17 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA03818>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:16:15 -0800
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA01826>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:16:14 -0800
Received: from [131.243.64.23] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1b11); Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:17:57 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03005500ad7d62914287@[131.243.64.23]>
In-Reply-To: <9603241927.AA24685@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: The 6bone name issue
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 09:17:57 -0800
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I will make one attempt to influence this naming issue, and then go with
the flow as I don't want to turn this into a silly naming argument.  That
is not my point.

My point is, that by choosing an all encompassing high profile name such as
GI6, we are not only getting away from our purpose, but run the risk of
alienating many who might otherwise help us.

I believe that the name 6bone accurately reflects our mbone-like mission of
deploying infrastructure for IPv6 prior to it being deployed fully in the
global Internet infrastructure.

In theory, it seems to me, our job is to enable all the appropriate
tunnels, and set related policies and practices for an IPv6 backbone
infrastructure.  Then our role will drop away as IPv6 is implemented in
production routers and normal operating policies and practices for the
"global" Internet take over.

So, my vote is to stay with 6bone - it's quite descriptive and has
reasonable name recognition due to the mbone.  Everyone would then easily
recognize us as a necessary, but yet interim, piece of the the evolution of
the Internet...not a threat.


Now I'll shut up.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 26 08:30:51 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA05920>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:38:45 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA05908>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:38:37 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA05909>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:38:34 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA27621; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:31:01 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA27763; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 13:30:53 -0500
Message-Id: <9603261830.AA27763@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Mar 96 09:17:57 PST."
             <v03005500ad7d62914287@[131.243.64.23]> 
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 13:30:51 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

You made a very valid point IMHO.  

Folks I don't care one way or the other.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 26 02:34:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA06446>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:55:09 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA06440>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:55:07 -0800
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA06828>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:55:06 -0800
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <17302(12)>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:35:09 PST
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:35:04 -0800
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Cc: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue 
In-Reply-To: RLFink's message of Tue, 26 Mar 96 09:17:57 -0800.
             <v03005500ad7d62914287@[131.243.64.23]> 
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 10:34:49 PST
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Mar26.103504pst.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Even though I was the one advocating "GII", on further reflection I agree
with Bob Fink.  Picking a gradiose name is liable just to cause confusion
and/or ill will in some quaters.  Also, being superstitious, I think it
would bring bad luck upon us to pick a name that assumes eventual World
Domination.  Better to pick a humble name like 6Bone.  Also, as Bob said,
the name 6Bone benefits from the analogy to the MBone, which is a succesful
example of exactly what we are trying to accomplish.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Mar 26 06:59:25 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14829>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:56:34 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14823>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:56:33 -0800
Received: from mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (foo-5-10.Ipsilon.COM) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA18750>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:56:28 -0800
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA19861; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:56:12 -0800
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v02140b04ad7e26d722b6@[205.226.1.20]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 1996 14:59:25 -0800
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden)
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

After more consideration, I too think that 6bone is the best name.

Unless, of course, we wanted to call it something like "Internet Pro" given
the industry naming trend.          :-)

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 17:34:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16319>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 15:36:40 -0800
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16280>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 15:36:37 -0800
Received: from shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA29412>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 15:36:24 -0800
Received: from junsotec.wide.ad.jp ([133.4.15.8]) by shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.6.11+2.5Wb2/3.3Wb4-shonan) with SMTP id IAA10848; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:34:42 +0900
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 08:34:42 +0900
Message-Id: <199603262334.IAA10848@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Sender: jun@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2J
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

folks,
I also agree with Bob Fink. I already mentioned the points in LA on the
possibility to lose some of the help.
Even I am thinking that some parts of the 6bone should be  physical test
nets instead  of logical ones with tunnels, I vote for 6bone. When we will
be over with 6bone purpose, we can change the name then.
jun


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 08:55:25 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA01693>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:55:30 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA01687>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:55:29 -0800
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA13699>; Tue, 26 Mar 1996 22:55:27 -0800
Received: from dxcoms.cern.ch by dxmint.cern.ch
	id AA24189; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:55:25 +0100
Received: by dxcoms.cern.ch; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/28Jul95-0949AM)
	id AA03423; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:55:25 +0100
Message-Id: <9603270655.AA03423@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:55:25 +0100 (MET)
From: "Brian Carpenter   CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
In-Reply-To: <9603261830.AA27763@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> from "bound@zk3.dec.com" at Mar 26, 96 01:30:51 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 94
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Sure, let's stay with 6bone. I only came up with GI6 because
Jim asked the question.

  Brian

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 05:41:27 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA06963>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:48:00 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA06949>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:47:51 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA27069>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 07:47:46 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA22963; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:41:31 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA16624; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:41:29 -0500
Message-Id: <9603271541.AA16624@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: The 6bone name issue 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Mar 96 14:59:25 PST."
             <v02140b04ad7e26d722b6@[205.226.1.20]> 
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 10:41:27 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I am for 6bone.  One thing I have learned about temporary functions is
to make sure in an organization all know they are temporary I think the
name 6bone does that?

Are we getting consensus????

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 08:50:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16238>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:59:20 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16232>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:59:16 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA12856>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 10:59:11 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA28603; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:50:55 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA30638; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 13:50:53 -0500
Message-Id: <9603271850.AA30638@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Mbone Charter/Objective/????? Doc
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 13:50:53 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I think we have our name ---> 6bone....  (not bone heads)...

Not getting any volunteers to write up a charter etc... so here is what
I will do .... As I recall there was an Mbone FAQ and how to use it
etc...  Is there something in there I can hack up and plagarize to get
this done?????  Anywhere on the net????

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 07:10:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA26190>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:08:23 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA26184>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:08:21 -0800
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA25842>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:08:19 -0800
Received: from [131.243.64.23] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1b11); Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:10:09 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03005508ad7f08a51a13@[131.243.64.23]>
In-Reply-To: <9603271850.AA30638@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: Mbone Charter/Objective/????? Doc
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 15:10:09 -0800
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jim,

>Not getting any volunteers to write up a charter etc... so here is what
>I will do .... As I recall there was an Mbone FAQ and how to use it
>etc...  Is there something in there I can hack up and plagarize to get
>this done?????  Anywhere on the net????

I was just about to do this myself.  The current MBONE pages are:

http://www.best.com/~prince/techinfo/mbone.html



If you can wait till tomorrow morning (before my meetings for the day start
:-) I'll try hacking something together and then you can do with it as you
will.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Mar 27 17:11:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA04111>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 19:18:41 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA04105>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 19:18:35 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA07317>; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 19:18:34 -0800
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA27981; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 22:11:49 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA11510; Wed, 27 Mar 1996 22:11:47 -0500
Message-Id: <9603280311.AA11510@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Mbone Charter/Objective/????? Doc 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 27 Mar 96 15:10:09 PST."
             <v03005508ad7f08a51a13@[131.243.64.23]> 
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 96 22:11:47 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

This sounds great... I can wait a week at this end.  Thanks...

So all know why I push on this write-up.  Its our init sales tool to get
folks started.  Yes we need to locate folks to do things and even folks
to own some admin, but like anything else we need to sell them on it. I
think in this case its just telling folks what we are trying to do. With
the work in the IETF, Vendor IPv6 Noise, Address Space Crunch,
Researchers chomping at the bit to use V6 with Flows (at least the ones
I speak with), Implementor Bake-Offs who can provide binaries for
existing equipment, Several router type vendors doing V6, and Customers
actually asking do I need to worry about IPv6 I think there is enough
momentum for general interest.  But they will need to know how they can
participate and what the technical strategy is to proceed.

thanks again,
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Apr  1 18:11:58 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA08332>; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:15:36 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA08326>; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:15:34 -0800
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA06287>; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:15:33 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA10027; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 23:12:02 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA15292; Sat, 30 Mar 1996 23:11:58 -0500
Message-Id: <9603310411.AA15292@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Draft of "what is the 6bone"
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 96 23:11:58 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi,

Bob Fink sent this to me and did a nice job.  I think its on target.  What 
do others think?

p.s. thanks Bob...

/jim


=================


What is the 6BONE?


The 6BONE is an outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that resulted in the
creation of the IPv6 protocols that will eventually replace the current
Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.  One essential part in
the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 is the development of an Internet-wide
IPv6 backbone infrastructure that can transport IPv6 packets.  As with
the existing IPv4 Internet backbone, the IPv6 backbone infrastructure
will be composed of many Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and user
networks linked together to provide the world-wide Internet.

Until the IPv6 protocols are widely implemented and fully tested for
interoperability, production ISP and user network routers will not
readily place production Internet (IPv4) routers at risk.  Thus a way
is needed to provide Internet-wide IPv6 transport in an organized and
orderly way for early testing and early use.  

The 6BONE is a virtual network layered on top of portions of the
physical IPv4-based Internet to support routing of IPv6 packets, as
that function has not yet been integrated into many production routers.
 The network is composed of islands that can directly support IPv6
packets, linked by virtual point-to-point links called "tunnels".  The
tunnel endpoints are typically workstation-class machines having
operating system support for IPv6.

Over time as confidence builds to allow production routers to carry
native IPv6 packets, it is expected that the 6BONE would disappear by
agreement of all parties.  It would be replaced in a transparent way by
production ISP and user network IPv6 Internet-wide transport.

The 6BONE is thus focused on providing the early policy and procedures
necessary to provide IPv6 transport in a reasonable fashion so testing
and experience can be carried out.  It would not attempt to provide new
network interconnect architectures, procedures and policies that are
clearly the purview of ISP and user network operators.  In fact, it is
the desire to include as many ISP and user network operators in the
6BONE process as possible to guarantee as seamless a transition to IPv6
as possible.

=================</fontfamily>


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Apr  1 15:14:11 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA26447>; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 03:14:18 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA26441>; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 03:14:16 -0800
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA23177>; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 03:14:14 -0800
Received: from dxcoms.cern.ch by dxmint.cern.ch
	id AA07526; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:14:12 +0200
Received: by dxcoms.cern.ch; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/28Jul95-0949AM)
	id AA31682; Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:14:11 +0200
Message-Id: <9604011114.AA31682@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: Draft of "what is the 6bone"
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1996 13:14:11 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Brian Carpenter   CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
In-Reply-To: <9603310411.AA15292@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> from "bound@zk3.dec.com" at Mar 30, 96 11:11:58 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 877
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Two comments

> The 6BONE is an outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that resulted in the
> creation of the IPv6 protocols that will eventually replace the current
> Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.

To avoid flame wars, I would slightly rewrite this sentence:

 The 6BONE is an independent outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that
 resulted in the creation of the IPv6 protocols intended eventually to
 replace the current Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.

(Reasons: 1. remove a possible implication that this is an IETF activity
	  2. remove assertion that v6 *will* replace v4)


The rest is just fine, but it leaves open the question "Who is
the 6BONE?" We could add

 The 6BONE is currently an informal collaborative project
 covering North America, Europe and Japan.

(Incidentally, Jun, maybe you should contact the guys at KEK?)

    Brian



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 07:33:38 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA10578>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:48:45 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA10570>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:48:44 -0800
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA29153>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:48:30 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA12153; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:35:05 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA24464; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:33:39 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021733.AA24464@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: "Brian Carpenter CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: Draft of "what is the 6bone" 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 01 Apr 96 13:14:11 +0200."
             <9604011114.AA31682@dxcoms.cern.ch> 
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 12:33:38 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Brian,

>Two comments

>> The 6BONE is an outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that resulted in the
>> creation of the IPv6 protocols that will eventually replace the current
>> Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.
>
>To avoid flame wars, I would slightly rewrite this sentence:

> The 6BONE is an independent outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that
> resulted in the creation of the IPv6 protocols intended eventually to
> replace the current Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.

>(Reasons: 1. remove a possible implication that this is an IETF activity
>	  2. remove assertion that v6 *will* replace v4)

I agree.

>The rest is just fine, but it leaves open the question "Who is
>the 6BONE?" We could add
>
> The 6BONE is currently an informal collaborative project
> covering North America, Europe and Japan.

I like this too.

>(Incidentally, Jun, maybe you should contact the guys at KEK?)

What is KEK?

thanks,
/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 07:39:03 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA10627>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:49:24 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA10621>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:49:23 -0800
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA29206>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 09:49:21 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA12222; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:42:11 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA19064; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:39:03 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021739.AA19064@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Updated Text for the 6bone What is It?
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 12:39:03 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I added Brian's comments and made 6bone use small caps to go with our
strategy of demphasis on the name...

If all are OK with this we can declare victory and move forward...

/jim


What is the 6bone?

The 6bone is an independent outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that 
resulted in the creation of the IPv6 protocols intended eventually to
replace the current Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.  
The 6bone is currently an informal collaborative project covering 
North America, Europe, and Japan.

One essential part in the IPv4 to IPv6 transition is the development 
of an Internet-wide IPv6 backbone infrastructure that can transport IPv6 
packets.  As with the existing IPv4 Internet backbone, the IPv6 
backbone infrastructure will be composed of many Internet Service 
Providers (ISPs) and user networks linked together to provide the 
world-wide Internet.

Until the IPv6 protocols are widely implemented and fully tested for
interoperability, production ISP and user network routers will not
readily place production Internet (IPv4) routers at risk.  Thus a way
is needed to provide Internet-wide IPv6 transport in an organized and
orderly way for early testing and early use.  

The 6bone is a virtual network layered on top of portions of the
physical IPv4-based Internet to support routing of IPv6 packets, as
that function has not yet been integrated into many production 
routers.  The network is composed of islands that can directly support 
IPv6 packets, linked by virtual point-to-point links called "tunnels".  
The tunnel endpoints are typically workstation-class machines having
operating system support for IPv6.

Over time, as confidence builds to allow production routers to carry
native IPv6 packets, it is expected that the 6bone would disappear by
agreement of all parties.  It would be replaced in a transparent way 
by production ISP and user network IPv6 Internet-wide transport.

The 6bone is thus focused on providing the early policy and procedures
necessary to provide IPv6 transport in a reasonable fashion so testing
and experience can be carried out.  It would not attempt to provide 
new network interconnect architectures, procedures and policies that 
are clearly the purview of ISP and user network operators.  In fact, 
it is the desire to include as many ISP and user network operators in 
the 6bone process as possible to guarantee a seamless transition to 
IPv6.


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 08:32:36 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA12659>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:38:51 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA12653>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:38:49 -0800
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA01708>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:38:46 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA12128; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:32:45 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA27645; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:32:36 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021832.AA27645@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Message to Engage RENATER in France
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 13:32:36 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: bound
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA25589; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 12:57:34 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021757.AA25589@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: prevost@sphinx.cea.fr
Cc: brian@dxcoms.cern.ch, bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: IPv6 Test Network 6bone
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 12:57:33 -0500
From: bound
X-Mts: smtp

Hi Jaques,

My name is Jim Bound and I am working with an informal group of IETF
colleagues to define and set up a world-wide test network for IPv6. Brian
Carpenter from CERN gave me your name as one who may be interested in this 
work.  My day job is at Digital Equipment Corporation in the U.S. where I am
the IPv6 Technical Director.  We have initial participants from multiple
vendors, universities, research, and network operators across North
America, Europe, and Japan. 

I have attached our DRAFT charter of "What is the 6bone".  Its critical
we have European participation for this effort.  

Brian has shared with me what RENATER is and it appears to be a good
place to add IPv6 nodes as part of the 6bone.  We also need 
leadership support to integrate 6bone across Europe.  

Are you interested in participating in this effort?  If so we could 
add you to our 6bone mailing list as we develop the details of 6bone, as
a first step?

thanks,
/jim

- -------------------------------------------------

What is the 6bone?

The 6bone is an independent outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that 
resulted in the creation of the IPv6 protocols intended eventually to
replace the current Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.  
The 6bone is currently an informal collaborative project covering 
North America, Europe, and Japan.

One essential part in the IPv4 to IPv6 transition is the development 
of an Internet-wide IPv6 backbone infrastructure that can transport IPv6 
packets.  As with the existing IPv4 Internet backbone, the IPv6 
backbone infrastructure will be composed of many Internet Service 
Providers (ISPs) and user networks linked together to provide the 
world-wide Internet.

Until the IPv6 protocols are widely implemented and fully tested for
interoperability, production ISP and user network routers will not
readily place production Internet (IPv4) routers at risk.  Thus a way
is needed to provide Internet-wide IPv6 transport in an organized and
orderly way for early testing and early use.  

The 6bone is a virtual network layered on top of portions of the
physical IPv4-based Internet to support routing of IPv6 packets, as
that function has not yet been integrated into many production 
routers.  The network is composed of islands that can directly support 
IPv6 packets, linked by virtual point-to-point links called "tunnels".  
The tunnel endpoints are typically workstation-class machines having
operating system support for IPv6.

Over time, as confidence builds to allow production routers to carry
native IPv6 packets, it is expected that the 6bone would disappear by
agreement of all parties.  It would be replaced in a transparent way 
by production ISP and user network IPv6 Internet-wide transport.

The 6bone is thus focused on providing the early policy and procedures
necessary to provide IPv6 transport in a reasonable fashion so testing
and experience can be carried out.  It would not attempt to provide 
new network interconnect architectures, procedures and policies that 
are clearly the purview of ISP and user network operators.  In fact, 
it is the desire to include as many ISP and user network operators in 
the 6bone process as possible to guarantee a seamless transition to 
IPv6.


------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 08:35:15 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13015>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:52:48 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA13009>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:52:47 -0800
Received: from mail11.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA02393>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:52:39 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail11.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA03086; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:37:21 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA14368; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:35:15 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021835.AA14368@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Message to Engage Denmark
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 13:35:15 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: bound
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA28048; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 13:07:38 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021807.AA28048@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Ole.Carsten.Pedersen@uni-c.dk
Cc: brian@dxcoms.cern.ch, bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: IPv6 Test Network 6bone
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 13:07:37 -0500
From: bound
X-Mts: smtp

Hi Ole,

My name is Jim Bound and I am working with an informal group of IETF
colleagues to define and set up a world-wide test network for IPv6. Brian
Carpenter from CERN gave me your name as one who may be interested in this 
work.  My day job is at Digital Equipment Corporation in the U.S. where I am
the IPv6 Technical Director.  We have initial participants from multiple
vendors, universities, research, and network operators across North
America, Europe, and Japan. 

I have attached our DRAFT charter of "What is the 6bone".  Its critical
we have European participation for this effort.  

Brian has shared with me your work at the University Computing Centre in
Dennark.  

Are you interested in participating in this effort?  If so we could 
add you to our 6bone mailing list as we develop the details of 6bone, as
a first step?

thanks,
/jim

- -------------------------------------------------

What is the 6bone?

The 6bone is an independent outgrowth of the IETF IPng project that 
resulted in the creation of the IPv6 protocols intended eventually to
replace the current Internet network layer protocols known as IPv4.  
The 6bone is currently an informal collaborative project covering 
North America, Europe, and Japan.

One essential part in the IPv4 to IPv6 transition is the development 
of an Internet-wide IPv6 backbone infrastructure that can transport IPv6 
packets.  As with the existing IPv4 Internet backbone, the IPv6 
backbone infrastructure will be composed of many Internet Service 
Providers (ISPs) and user networks linked together to provide the 
world-wide Internet.

Until the IPv6 protocols are widely implemented and fully tested for
interoperability, production ISP and user network routers will not
readily place production Internet (IPv4) routers at risk.  Thus a way
is needed to provide Internet-wide IPv6 transport in an organized and
orderly way for early testing and early use.  

The 6bone is a virtual network layered on top of portions of the
physical IPv4-based Internet to support routing of IPv6 packets, as
that function has not yet been integrated into many production 
routers.  The network is composed of islands that can directly support 
IPv6 packets, linked by virtual point-to-point links called "tunnels".  
The tunnel endpoints are typically workstation-class machines having
operating system support for IPv6.

Over time, as confidence builds to allow production routers to carry
native IPv6 packets, it is expected that the 6bone would disappear by
agreement of all parties.  It would be replaced in a transparent way 
by production ISP and user network IPv6 Internet-wide transport.

The 6bone is thus focused on providing the early policy and procedures
necessary to provide IPv6 transport in a reasonable fashion so testing
and experience can be carried out.  It would not attempt to provide 
new network interconnect architectures, procedures and policies that 
are clearly the purview of ISP and user network operators.  In fact, 
it is the desire to include as many ISP and user network operators in 
the 6bone process as possible to guarantee a seamless transition to 
IPv6.



------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 09:05:19 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14126>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:19:47 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14120>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:19:46 -0800
Received: from mail11.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA03888>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 11:19:44 -0800
Received: from bwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail11.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA06824; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 14:07:25 -0500
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA01159; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 14:05:20 -0500
Message-Id: <9604021905.AA01159@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: IPv6 Across Europe starting in ScottLand
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 14:05:19 -0500
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I will help Alex (below) with the proposal.  I will make sure our 6bone
charter and other parts are in the proposal.

OK we have a proposal via Jun Murai in Asia and several potentials in
Europe.

What about the U.S?  How do we get this started?  Do we need to 
request money for ISI or Lawerence at Berkeley?  ????   How do we do
that?  

How about if we send mail to V.P. Al Gore and Senator Patrick Lehaey? I am
not kidding?????????????

Mike Carlton?  Whats the word at ISI???????????

Is it time to tell the implementors list about us yet?

We need a list of implementations people can use to get started?

/jim

------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: daemon
Received: from galpha.zk3.dec.com by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA20885; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:38:56 -0500
Received: from mail11.digital.com by falpha.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/20May95-1022AM)
	id AA15059; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:38:46 -0500
Received: from oberon.wintermute.co.uk by mail11.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA00520; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 10:26:13 -0500
Received: from puck.wintermute.co.uk (puck.wintermute.co.uk [193.133.228.9]) by oberon.wintermute.co.uk (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id QAA10794 for <bound@zk3.dec.com>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 16:30:22 +0100
Message-Id: <31615283.3F14@wintermute.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 1996 16:14:59 +0000
From: Alex Clark <alex@wintermute.co.uk>
Organization: Wintermute Ltd.
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0GoldB1 (Win95; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: IPv6
X-Url: http://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng/html/ipng-implementations.html
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I have been asked to put forward a proposal to utilise a new network
to develop an internet for a primarily business market. It will
initially be city based (probably Aberdeen, Scotland) but within
months be connected to other new networks and it is hoped will be
Europe wide by the end of the year. Funding for this network will 
be partly coming from national and European government.

For reasons of their own they do not wish the network to utilise
the existing Internet (except through the occasional controlled
gateway). 

When deciding for a protocol for this network it really needs to
be IP based as it has proved itself over the past 25 years to be
scalable and reliable. I have suggested that this network would 
be an ideal opportunity to run a fully compliant IPv6 network.
This way we have all the facilities that business would like to
utilise such as security and service level (bandwidth) guarantees
& allocation are made available. 

Also we feel it would be of great interest to software and 
hardware developers of this new protocol to have a real life 
testbed for their new products. 

This is the reason for this e-mail. Would you be interested, in
principle, to supporting such a venture? Before I send the 
proposal it would be good to get an indication of the interest
from Internet businesses to support an International IPv6 network.
An indication of the products you will have avaiable for
distribution or test would be useful as well as an indication of 
how you think you may be able to help.

Thankyou for your time,

Alex Clark

- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Clark                                  alex@wintermute.co.uk
Business Manager                      http://www.wintermute.co.uk
Wintermute Ltd                                  Tel: 01224 595111
18 Bridge Street, Aberdeen. AB1 1RX             Fax: 01224 595333
- -----------------------------------------------------------------

------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr  2 07:16:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA23217>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:16:06 -0800
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA23211>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:16:05 -0800
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA14778>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:16:04 -0800
Received: from bat.isi.edu by darkstar.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA05728>; Tue, 2 Apr 1996 15:16:03 -0800
Message-Id: <199604022316.AA05728@darkstar.isi.edu>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Reply-To: carlton@ISI.EDU
Subject: 6bone at ISI
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 02 Apr 1996 14:05:19 -0500.
             <9604021905.AA01159@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Tue, 02 Apr 96 15:16:02 PST
From: Mike Carlton <carlton@ISI.EDU>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


In another message, Jim Bound asks:

> What about the U.S?  How do we get this started?  Do we need to 
> request money for ISI or Lawerence at Berkeley?  ????   How do we do
> that?  
> 
> How about if we send mail to V.P. Al Gore and Senator Patrick Lehaey? I am
> not kidding?????????????
> 
> Mike Carlton?  Whats the word at ISI???????????

I've spoken with Jon Postel and he is willing to have ISI manage
(or whatever the right term is) the US portion of the 6bone.

For now, I'm willing (and able) to take on the role here, but as the
6bone becomes more widespread (and the time required goes up) we will
need to check into obtaining funding and explicitly allocating someone
to support the network.  I've spoken with Steve Casner about his
experience with the Mbone and he indicated that it required a fair
amount of effort as it grew.

On a different note, new or interested subscribers to the 6bone list are
sent a short blurb describing the list.  Currently it reads:
	The 6bone list is for the discussion of the development of the
	initial IPv6 network.

Before widely advertising the list, we probably want to update that.
Maybe we can abstract the charter documents?

cheers,
--mike


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Apr  7 17:23:27 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA03897>; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:28:08 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA03890>; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:28:07 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA08679>; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 18:28:00 -0700
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA24867; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 21:23:38 -0400
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA05032; Sun, 7 Apr 1996 21:23:27 -0400
Message-Id: <9604080123.AA05032@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: carlton@ISI.EDU
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: 6bone at ISI 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 02 Apr 96 15:16:02 PST."
             <199604022316.AA05728@darkstar.isi.edu> 
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 96 21:23:27 -0400
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Mike,

>In another message, Jim Bound asks:
>
>> What about the U.S?  How do we get this started?  Do we need to 
>> request money for ISI or Lawerence at Berkeley?  ????   How do we do
>> that?  
>> 
>> How about if we send mail to V.P. Al Gore and Senator Patrick Lehaey? I am
>> not kidding?????????????
>> 
>> Mike Carlton?  Whats the word at ISI???????????
>
>I've spoken with Jon Postel and he is willing to have ISI manage
>(or whatever the right term is) the US portion of the 6bone.

Great.  Jon should be added to this list now I think.  If he is not on
already.

>For now, I'm willing (and able) to take on the role here, but as the
>6bone becomes more widespread (and the time required goes up) we will
>need to check into obtaining funding and explicitly allocating someone
>to support the network.  I've spoken with Steve Casner about his
>experience with the Mbone and he indicated that it required a fair
>amount of effort as it grew.

True.  I am nervous just to think about the mail to begin.

>On a different note, new or interested subscribers to the 6bone list are
>sent a short blurb describing the list.  Currently it reads:
>	The 6bone list is for the discussion of the development of the
>	initial IPv6 network.

>Before widely advertising the list, we probably want to update that.
>Maybe we can abstract the charter documents?

We need to determine what else we need besides our present charter
document????  

What do you and others think we need before we announce it????

thanks,
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Apr 11 00:17:38 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16953>; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:17:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16947>; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:17:45 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA09980>; Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:17:44 -0700
Received: from [131.243.64.23] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1b11); Thu, 11 Apr 1996 06:20:05 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03005505ad92c42151f2@[131.243.64.23]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 07:17:38 -0700
To: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound  DIgital)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6BONE web site
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jim,

If still no volunteers, I'll host a 6BONE web site.

If you want me to do this, do you (or anyone else) have an idea of what you
want on it to start?


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Apr 12 17:09:51 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14985>; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:10:37 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA14979>; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:10:36 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA05529>; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 18:10:34 -0700
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA24165; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 21:09:51 -0400
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA18319; Fri, 12 Apr 1996 21:09:51 -0400
Message-Id: <9604130109.AA18319@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: 6BONE web site 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 96 07:17:38 PDT."
             <v03005505ad92c42151f2@[131.243.64.23]> 
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 96 21:09:51 -0400
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

>If still no volunteers, I'll host a 6BONE web site.

This would be really great.

>If you want me to do this, do you (or anyone else) have an idea of what you
>want on it to start?

I think the charter and a note we are adding to our list now.  And how
to join the mail list.  I would have a pointer to the IPng WWW
implementation page as that is the starting point for tunnels anyway.

THen possibly our to-do list we made up initially?

Do others have ideas for Bob?

p.s. Mike are you ready to start taking subscribers?  We can use the
charter as the announcement message when they subscribe?  

thanks
/jim



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Apr 19 11:23:31 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA25941>; Fri, 19 Apr 1996 12:38:06 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA25935>; Fri, 19 Apr 1996 12:38:05 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA15886>; Fri, 19 Apr 1996 12:37:51 -0700
Received: from wasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (5.65v3.2/1.0/WV)
	id AA05102; Fri, 19 Apr 1996 15:23:37 -0400
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA05214; Fri, 19 Apr 1996 15:23:32 -0400
Message-Id: <9604191923.AA05214@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, ipv6imp@munnari.oz.au
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: 6bone WWW Page Pointer
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 96 15:23:31 -0400
From: bound@zk3.dec.com
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

FYI... See the charter, requirements, mission, etc... at 

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Apr 24 04:11:10 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA18941>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 07:11:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA18935>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 07:11:16 -0700
Received: from locutus.weareb.org by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA05341>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 07:11:11 -0700
Received: (from mclay@localhost) by locutus.weareb.org (8.7.4/8.7.4) id JAA04771 for 6bone@isi.edu; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:11:10 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Clay <mclay@weareb.org>
Message-Id: <199604241411.JAA04771@locutus.weareb.org>
Subject: Question about sites
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6 Bone)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:11:10 -0500 (CDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL0a9]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Hello,
    I was wondering if any portion of the 6bone has been set up yet, and if
so, if someone could give me a list of sites to which I could tunnel for
the purpose of testing ping6 and similar low-level functionality.
I looked at the 6bone web page, but no indication was given as to whether
or not any sort of network yet exists.  Please excuse me if this info
exists in a FAQ.

Regards,
Mike Clay

-- 
------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------
 Michael Clay     | "Maybe you should call the Internet and talk to their
 mclay@weareb.org | tech support people."  --  AOL Customer Service
------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Apr 24 23:39:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA00683>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 12:39:58 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA00677>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 12:39:56 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-22)
	id <AA21316>; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 12:39:51 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id VAA00827; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 21:39:45 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (localhost.inria.fr [127.0.0.1]) by givry.inria.fr (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA11351; Wed, 24 Apr 1996 21:39:44 +0200
Message-Id: <199604241939.VAA11351@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: Michael Clay <mclay@weareb.org>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6 Bone)
Subject: Re: Question about sites 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:11:10 CDT.
             <199604241411.JAA04771@locutus.weareb.org> 
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 21:39:42 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

       I was wondering if any portion of the 6bone has been set up yet, and if
   so, if someone could give me a list of sites to which I could tunnel for
   the purpose of testing ping6 and similar low-level functionality.

=> I know the G6 (:-) in France and the DFN testbed in Germany.
I'll send to you the URL of the G6 if I can find in time the
last pages... The domain of the main G6 testbed is ipv6.imag.fr
and the contact is Alain.Durand@imag.fr.

   I looked at the 6bone web page, but no indication was given as to whether
   or not any sort of network yet exists.

=> I was until this evening in Berlin for the 24th RIPE meeting.
The IPv6 WG has proposed to coordinate the 6bone activities in
the RIPE area (ie more than Europe).

   Please excuse me if this info exists in a FAQ.

=> I have not seen this point (FAQ) in the action list of the 6 bone.
It *should* be added!

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

PS: if you don't know RIPE, it is a coordination of IP operators,
users, ... in the large Europe (cf RFC 1181). The IPv6 WG is
supposed to coordinate tests and to provide feedback to operators
and users (and do more when IPv6 will be deployed).

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Apr 30 13:04:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16828>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:01:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-20)
	id <AA16822>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:01:20 -0700
Received: from unidhp1.uni-c.dk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24197>; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 02:01:18 -0700
Received: by unidhp1.uni-c.dk
	(1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA214685087; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 11:04:47 +0200
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 11:04:46 +0200 (METDST)
From: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: UNI-C partipation
Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960430105950.19584B-100000@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


UNI-C, the Danish Computing Center for Education and Research, has currently
got five TBC2000 routers from the Danish company Telebit install running IPv6 
over the national wide ATM backbone, DENET, linking the major universities. 
Later this year the IPv6 topology will be expanded with one more router. UNI-C 
is responsible for testing the equipment from Telebit, to ensure that the IPv6 
protocols are correctly implemented and that the Telebit routers can operate 
in a hetrogenious IPv6 network. Currently we also have a SUN-station running 
IPv6 set up. On this background we would very much like to join the 6bone 
project.

Contact person at UNI-C for IPng and 6bone activities is

---------------- oo000oo ----------------------------------
Gudrun Dalgeir             phone  : (+) 45 35878532
UNI-C                      fax    : (+) 45 35878890
Vermundsgade 5             e-mail : Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk
DK-2100 Kbh. O             www    : http://www.denet.dk/  
-----------------------------------------------------------








From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed May  8 00:01:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29983>; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:02:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29977>; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:01:52 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17821>; Wed, 8 May 1996 07:01:50 -0700
Received: from [131.243.64.23] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Wed, 8 May 1996 06:05:10 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03006c0eadb6596e1fb8@[131.243.64.23]>
In-Reply-To: <199605080046.TAA11502@locutus.weareb.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 07:01:47 -0700
To: Michael Clay <mclay@weareb.org>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: Logo Contest
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Mike,

>    It was not clear from the web page which of you was running the logo
>contest, so I'm sending this entry to both of you.
>
>Regards,
>Mike Clay
>Austin, TX


Your logo is now online on the 6bone logo contest web page.  Six bones - cute!


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jun 10 00:07:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02615>; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:07:28 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02609>; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:07:24 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11628>; Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:07:23 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:08:06 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007302ade1db0ff52b@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound  Digital),
        nitzan@es.net (Becca Nitzan NERSC/LLNL),
        collins@es.net (Mike Collins ESnet)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jim Bound and a few others of us think that a 6bone BOF in Montreal might
be a useful activity.  A possible agenda for such is shown below, tho it
can certainly be bashed like any other :-)


Jim also opined that an evening BOF might be best.

So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and
location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...?


Thanks,

Bob Fink
Lawrence Berkeley Lab

===============

6bone BOF session for Montreal IETF:


*  strawmen proposals

   DNS flagging with v4 compatible v6 address
   tunnel proposal (including overview of options)
   v6 address assignment
   registry (interim)
   other


*  6bone regional coordinators

   European
   Pacific Rim
   US/Canada


*  participant plans

   ESnet
   UNI-C
   other

-



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 03:17:17 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07657>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:43:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07651>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:43:23 -0700
Received: from shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28835>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:43:21 -0700
Received: from junhinote.uptown.wide.ad.jp ([133.246.206.14]) by shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/3.3Wb4-shonan) with SMTP id SAA05350; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:40:26 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199606120940.SAA05350@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Sender: jun@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2-J (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:17:17 +0900
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound  Digital),
        nitzan@es.net (Becca Nitzan NERSC/LLNL),
        collins@es.net (Mike Collins ESnet)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

folks,
we just have started the physical version of 6bone/japan between tokyo and nara.
as well as the funding goes, i and/or somebody from my group would like to
report on the status update of them from jp/asia when the bof is on.
jun
At 07:07 96/06/10 -0700, Bob Fink LBNL wrote:
> Jim Bound and a few others of us think that a 6bone BOF in Montreal might
> be a useful activity.  A possible agenda for such is shown below, tho it
> can certainly be bashed like any other :-)
> 
> 
> Jim also opined that an evening BOF might be best.
> 
> So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and
> location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...?


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 03:19:20 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07647>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:42:42 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07641>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:42:40 -0700
Received: from shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28832>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 02:42:34 -0700
Received: from junhinote.uptown.wide.ad.jp ([133.246.206.14]) by shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/3.3Wb4-shonan) with SMTP id SAA05436 for <6bone@ISI.EDU>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:42:30 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Sender: jun@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2-J (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 18:19:20 +0900
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
From: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

folks,
originally, we have been planning to work on this on 6:66am of June 6. but
delayed. sorry.
note that we have constructed a physical testbed rather than a logical one,
to avoid possible confusion on the existing testbed of WIDE. Our plan is to
extend this with some more physical means, and also with logical means as
well. we also plan to use our T1 cable to MCI california pop if somebody out
there would like to work together.
here is a short report from Kazu Yamamoto (kazu@wide.ad.jp).. 
jun
---
At 15:22 on Jun 9th, 1996, the first IPv6 packet traveled on the WIDE
6bone whose topology at that time is as follows:

           133.4.6.34                133.4.21.33
           ntwo0  Serial(64k)        ntwo1   Serial(64k)
Univ Tokyo ----------------- Iwanami ---------------  Nara(zeta)
    | ne0              ntwo1   | ne0            ntwo0   | we0
    |             133.4.6.33   |          133.4.21.34   |
----+-----  Ether          ----+---- Ether          ----+---- Ether
 133.4.6.66                133.4.49.30               133.4.23.16


Every node is equipped with WIDE/Nara v6 kernel on BSD/OS 2.1 and has
IPv4-compatible IPv6 address. The two 64k serial lines are saved from
WIDE v4 backbone with Paradyne, a multiplex CSU and supported by
RISCOM/N2, a high speed serial interface on PC AT, attached to Cisco
HDLC. This means that WIDE 6bone is not virtual (like Mbone) but
physical.

The following is ping results from Nara to Tokyo.

zeta# ./ping6 ::133.4.6.34
trying to get source for ::133.4.6.34
source should be ::8504:1522
PING ::133.4.6.34 (::8504:622): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=0 ttl=254 time=85.173 ms
64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=1 ttl=254 time=85.071 ms
64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=2 ttl=254 time=85.145 ms
64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=3 ttl=254 time=85.086 ms
64 bytes from ::8504:622: icmp6_seq=4 ttl=254 time=85.152 ms

We are planning to interconnect to Keio univ, Osaka univ, Hitachi
ltd, and NTT in the near future.


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 12 03:09:40 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08317>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 04:11:16 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08310>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 04:11:12 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00190>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 04:11:10 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id HAA13599; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 07:09:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA17601; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 07:09:40 -0400
Message-Id: <9606121109.AA17601@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Jun 96 18:19:20 +0900."
             <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> 
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 07:09:40 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jun,

This is truly WONDERFUL and EXCELLENT!

Congratulations,
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jun 11 23:37:15 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09620>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:38:13 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09614>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:38:11 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03801>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:37:50 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <14594(9)>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:37:40 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:37:28 -0700
To: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: (physical)6bone experience in WIDE/Japan 
In-Reply-To: jun's message of Wed, 12 Jun 96 02:19:20 -0800.
             <199606120942.SAA05436@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp> 
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:37:15 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jun12.063728pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> At 15:22 on Jun 9th, 1996, the first IPv6 packet traveled on the WIDE
> 6bone...

Congratulations!

> Every node is equipped with WIDE/Nara v6 kernel on BSD/OS 2.1 and has
> IPv4-compatible IPv6 address.

Why are you not using native IPv6 addresses from the address space
allocated for IPv6 testing, rather than IPv4-compatible IPv6 addresses?
As far as I understand, that only time you should need to use IPv4-compat.
addresses is for IPv6 hosts that do not have a neighboring IPv6 router.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jun 11 23:54:18 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09796>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:55:02 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09790>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:55:00 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04386>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:54:59 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15080(1)>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:54:42 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:54:30 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal 
In-Reply-To: RLFink's message of Mon, 10 Jun 96 07:07:22 -0800.
             <v03007302ade1db0ff52b@[131.243.112.98]> 
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 06:54:18 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jun12.065430pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

> So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and
> location,

For an official BOF (i.e., one listed on the IETF agenda and assigned
a room by the Secretariat), you need pre-approval from an IESG member,
e.g., one of our Area Directors.  Also, I suspect that it might be too
late to get a BOF scheduled -- the agenda for Montreal is already packed
full.  Still, it's worth a try.

> e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you,...

Monday is out -- there's an ipngwg meeting that evening.  I assume that
Tuesday evening is the IETF social, since there are no meetings scheduled
for that night, but I haven't yet seen any info on the social.  Personally,
I usually skip the social, so Tuesday would be OK with me.  Also, Thursday
after the Open IESG meeting would be fine with me, especially if we held
the BOF over dinner somewhere.

For the agenda, we need to discuss the status of router implementations,
e.g., do we have a routing protocol implemented yet for the 6bone, or will
we have to use static routes initially.  Also, under "participant plans"
I'd be happy to report on our project to get IPv6 into Dartnet, which
has just begun.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 12 06:14:25 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10228>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 07:25:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10222>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 07:25:15 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05565>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 07:25:14 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id KAA18755; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 10:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA00334; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 10:14:26 -0400
Message-Id: <9606121414.AA00334@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 12 Jun 96 06:54:18 PDT."
             <96Jun12.065430pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com> 
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 96 10:14:25 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

All I always skip the social so that night is good for me.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 12 10:42:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29970>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:44:25 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29940>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:43:52 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04652>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 13:43:52 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 1235"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I5TRKVFVLU002G83@FNAL.FNAL.GOV>;
 Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:43:46 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id PAA01776; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:42:48 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:42:47 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
In-Reply-To: "10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 PDT."
 <"v03007302ade1db0ff52b"@[131.243.112.98]>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@LBL.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound  Digital),
        nitzan@es.net (Becca Nitzan NERSC/LLNL),
        collins@es.net (Mike Collins ESnet)
Message-Id: <199606122042.PAA01776@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

    So...any opinions before I ask the secretariat to set up a time and
    location, e.g., which evening is best (or worst) for you, agenda items...?

Well, I usually go to the social, but (a) there hasn't been a peep
about one and (b) I seem to be outnumbered on that point, so Tuesday
or late Thursday seem prime.
					Matt

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 12 08:31:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06663>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:30:33 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06656>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:30:30 -0700
Received: from mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (foo-5-10.Ipsilon.COM) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12610>; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:30:29 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with SMTP id PAA21724; Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:30:26 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v02140b1cade4f560f154@[205.226.1.20]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 1996 15:31:47 -0700
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@LBL.gov>, 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer),
        bound@zk3.dec.com (Jim Bound  Digital),
        nitzan@es.net (Becca Nitzan NERSC/LLNL),
        collins@es.net (Mike Collins ESnet), Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden)
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Tuesday is fine for me.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 00:15:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20860>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:15:57 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20853>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:15:54 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13468>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:15:53 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:16:45 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007303ade5cf93e6e5@[131.243.112.98]>
In-Reply-To: <199606122042.PAA01776@munin.fnal.gov>
References: "10 Jun 1996 07:07:22 PDT."
 <"v03007302ade1db0ff52b"@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:15:59 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Gentle folks,

Given that I am not able to get the IETF secretariat to assign any BOF
space (they say there is no more!), I think we are left with being an
informal meeting for this IETF.

The principal suggestion has been an evening meeting, Tuesday or Thursday,
possibly over dinner.

May I make another suggestion.  I don't think we need a particularly long
meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to
1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room.  This way
everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk
show up for the 1300 meeting.

Then if we agree we need more discussion time, we can agree to an evening
meeting, say that evening (Tues) if there really is no social, or on
Thursday after the plenary.


Bob




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 00:52:56 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22263>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:53:43 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22255>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:53:40 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15198>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:53:40 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15229(3)>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:53:16 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:53:05 -0700
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal 
In-Reply-To: RLFink's message of Thu, 13 Jun 96 07:15:59 -0800.
             <v03007303ade5cf93e6e5@[131.243.112.98]> 
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 07:52:56 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jun13.075305pdt.75270@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

> May I make another suggestion.  I don't think we need a particularly long
> meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to
> 1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room.

That would be fine with me.  Will you provide sandwiches?  :-)

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 06:51:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22830>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 08:10:31 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22824>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 08:10:29 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16015>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 08:10:25 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id KAA19775; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:51:27 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA20849; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:51:24 -0400
Message-Id: <9606131451.AA20849@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Jun 96 07:15:59 PDT."
             <v03007303ade5cf93e6e5@[131.243.112.98]> 
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 96 10:51:24 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

This works for me.  Tues Lunch first.  

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 02:43:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27755>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:42:23 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27749>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:42:18 -0700
Received: from mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (foo-5-10.Ipsilon.COM) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20820>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:42:17 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with SMTP id JAA19741; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:41:38 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v02140b15ade5f565a9c5@[205.226.1.20]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:43:00 -0700
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden)
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

>May I make another suggestion.  I don't think we need a particularly long
>meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to
>1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room.  This way
>everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk
>show up for the 1300 meeting.
>

Fine by me too.  If we could figure how to get some lunch brought in it
would be great!

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jun 14 10:33:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28757>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:57:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28751>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:57:16 -0700
Received: from shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21637>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 09:57:14 -0700
Received: from junhinote.uptown.wide.ad.jp ([133.4.15.9]) by shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/3.3Wb4-shonan) with SMTP id BAA09126; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:57:03 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199606131657.BAA09126@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Sender: jun@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2-J (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:33:32 +0900
To: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden)
From: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Cc: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>, 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

i vote for thursday. i alreday have an appointment on tuesday. but if the
mojority is on tuesday, then let me try to move the existing appointment away.
jun
At 09:43 96/06/13 -0700, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Bob,
> 
> >May I make another suggestion.  I don't think we need a particularly long
> >meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to
> >1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room.  This way
> >everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk
> >show up for the 1300 meeting.
> >
> 
> Fine by me too.  If we could figure how to get some lunch brought in it
> would be great!
> 
> Bob
> 
> 
> 
> 


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jun 13 03:49:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02819>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:49:29 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02808>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:49:27 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25676>; Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:49:26 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:50:17 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007304ade602f741e8@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 10:49:32 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone meeting Tuesday 1130 to 1300 after the IPng meeting
Cc: Scott Bradner <sob@newdev.harvard.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Enough folk can make a 6bone meeting Tuesday from 1130 to 1300 after the
IPng meeting, in the same room, that I think we should do it.

If folk will let me know they are coming to the meeting so I can get a head
count, I'll see if there is a possibility of getting some lunch delivered.


I'll reconstitute an agenda from what I've seen on the mailer, and send it
to the list in a few days.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jun 14 12:49:35 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12746>; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:54:18 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12740>; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:54:16 -0700
Received: from calypso.urec.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03422>; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 01:54:15 -0700
Received: from phoebe.urec.fr by calypso.urec.fr
	  (8.6.10/urec-1.0) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:53:48 +0200
Received: by phoebe.urec.fr
	  (8.6.9/urec-0.9); Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:49:35 +0200
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 10:49:35 +0200
From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Message-Id: <199606140849.KAA15597@phoebe.urec.fr>
To: RLFink@lbl.gov
Subject: Re: a 6bone BOF in Montreal
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


|   From majordom@ISI.EDU Thu Jun 13 19:04 MET 1996
|   
|   >May I make another suggestion.  I don't think we need a particularly long
|   >meeting, so why not have it during the Tuesday lunch break from 1130 to
|   >1300, right after the IPng WG meeting using the same room.  This way
|   >everyone interested is there already, and we just keep the room till folk
|   >show up for the 1300 meeting.
|   >
|   

====BT: fine with me too. 

  +Bernard Tuy.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jun 22 04:58:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27961>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:05 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27955>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:04 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05231>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:04 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:09 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007403adf1f081e6ec@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:58:02 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone logo contest delayed
Cc: Patrick Bernier <bernier@mlink.net>, Michael Clay <mclay@weareb.org>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I must beg forbearance from Patrick Bernier and Michael Clay, who both
submitted nice 6bone logos, but I have been too busy to get to the contest
conclusion in time for the Montreal IETF.

Also, I would prefer to have a few more logos, and more importantly, be
able to use this to get a little more attention for the 6bone project.

So, at the moment, I would propose delaying this till the December IETF
meeting (San Jose I think).  Maybe we will be a little further along with
the 6bone and can advertize by having our own logo'd t-shirt available!


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jun 22 04:57:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27952>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:51 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27946>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:50 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05227>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:49 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:55 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007400adf1e91427d3@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 11:57:49 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folk,

Here is yet another draft agenda for the meeting in Montreal on Tuesday,
1130 till 1300, right after the IPng meeting, in the same room.

Please wait to bash it till the meeting.

I will be trying to get some sodas and sandwiches for the meeting.


Thanks,

Bob

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
6bone agenda


*  issues for discussion

   what routing to use
   routing registry
   how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addressing
   v6 address assignment
   tunnelling
   v6 testbed interconnection and regional process startup
   other


*  participant reports and plans

   ESnet
   Dartnet
   G6
   Japan 6bone
   RIPE
   UNI-C
   other


*  6bone regional coordination

   European
   Pacific Rim
   US/Canada

-



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jun 22 07:27:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28785>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:25:59 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28779>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:25:57 -0700
Received: from mailrelay.Ipsilon.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08438>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:25:56 -0700
Received: from [205.158.242.78] (ws1.ipsilon15.xo.com [205.158.242.78]) by mailrelay.ipsilon.com (8.6.10/8.6.10) with SMTP id OAA10155; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:52:48 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@tester.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v02140b04adf21590df66@[205.158.242.78]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:27:22 -0700
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: hinden@ipsilon.com (Bob Hinden)
Subject: Re: 6bone logo contest delayed
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), Patrick Bernier <bernier@mlink.net>,
        Michael Clay <mclay@weareb.org>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

T-Shirts are a great idea!

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jun 21 22:56:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28909>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:35:51 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28903>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:35:50 -0700
Received: from shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08672>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 14:35:48 -0700
Received: from junhinote.uptown.wide.ad.jp (ip218.san-francisco2.ca.interramp.com [38.11.195.218]) by shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/3.3Wb4-shonan) with SMTP id GAA07110; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 06:35:41 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199606222135.GAA07110@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Sender: jun@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2-J (32)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-2022-JP"
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 13:56:39 +0900
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
From: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
Subject: Re: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

bob,
are we going to have a projector in the room, for VGA?
jun

At 11:57 96/06/22 -0700, Bob Fink LBNL wrote:
> 6bone folk,
> 
> Here is yet another draft agenda for the meeting in Montreal on Tuesday,
> 1130 till 1300, right after the IPng meeting, in the same room.
> 


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jun 22 08:10:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29181>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29175>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:47 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09356>; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:46 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:52 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007404adf21f98f7ba@[131.243.112.98]>
In-Reply-To: <199606222135.GAA07110@shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 15:10:46 -0700
To: Jun Murai <jun@wide.ad.jp>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone meeting agenda for Montreal - Tuesday 1130-1300
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jun,

>are we going to have a projector in the room, for VGA?

I doubt it as I'm not an official meeting and I don't believe that they do
this normally for regular meetings.  I can ask, but be prepared to not have
on available (i.e., assume vu-grafs only).


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jun 25 22:52:13 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22913>; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:52:55 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22907>; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:52:54 -0700
Received: from calypso.urec.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18846>; Tue, 25 Jun 1996 11:52:48 -0700
Received: by calypso.urec.fr
	  (8.6.10/urec-1.0); Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:52:13 +0200
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 1996 20:52:13 +0200
From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr (Bernard TUY)
Message-Id: <199606251852.UAA02403@calypso.urec.fr>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: G6 
Content-Length: 586
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


	As the BOF meetingheld at noon, and may be many of you either can't
  attend or weren't aware of it, I don't want to let you wait further
  more this info you asked me a while ago ...
  The G6 is a french group "playing" with many things related to IPv6.
  To know more precisely what is running, planned ... please have a look at
  http://www.urec.fr/IPv6/G6-english.html


  And if you're able to read French, you even can go 
  to http://www.urec.fr/IPv6

  Have fun with this -and of course all questions, comments ... are 
  wellcome to g6@imag.fr !

  Cheers,

  +bernard Tuy.


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 26 07:29:33 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20591>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:34 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20585>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:32 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20663>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:32 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:46 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007404adf75beaf3b3@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 14:29:33 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6BONE meeting report - 25 Jun 96 - Montreal
Cc: RLFink@LBL.gov (Bob Fink LBNL)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


                     6BONE Meeting Report
                        26 June 1996
                    Montreal, Canada  IETF

The agenda was:

1. Opening remarks & agenda bashing

        a. background of 6bone to date
        b. 6bone purpose
        c. web site:  www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone

2. Technical discussion issues

        a. what routing to use
        b. routing registry
        c. how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addresses
        d. v6 address assignment
        e. tunnelling
        f. v6 testbed interconnect/regional process startup

3. Particpant Reports/Plans

        a. ESnet
        b. Dartnet
        c. G6
        d. Japan
        e. RIPE
        f. UNI-C

4. 6bone Regional Coordinators

        a. Europe
        b. Pacific Rim
        c. US/Canada

=3D=3D=3D
1. Opening remarks and agenda bashing


An unofficial IETF BOF was convened with Bob Fink as chair.  He noted that
it had been too late to get an official BOF slot due to IETF plenary
requirements to keep the number of parallel tracks to 7 or less.  Thus the
meeting was held unofficially during the lunch hour (thanks to the IETF
organizers) following the IPng session that morning.

Jim Bound asked if it was appropriate that we try to become involved with
the IETF "official" process as he wanted to see the 6bone effort free to
operate without unecessary rules and procedures.  This was left as an open
issue.


a. background of 6bone to date

The background of the 6bone "startup" meeting at the LA IETF was stated,
and those interested are referred to the 6bone web site.


b. 6bone purpose

The chair displayed the purpose statement and Steve Deering asked that the
sentence on tunnel endpoints typically being workstation-class machnines be
removed.  There was consensus to do so.


c. web site:  www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone

This web site includes the purpose statement, the notes of the LA IETF
"startup" meeting and instructions on joining the mailer.



2. Technical discussion issues


a. what routing to use

Steve Deering started the discussion by noting the need to start small and
grow as needed.  Static routes at the start seemed best.  There was
consensus on this, with the caveat that there be freedom/ability to change
as the 6bone grows.

Comments made by various folk supported this position.

It was noted that it wasn't necessary to specify routing for within
"islands of v6", rather how they interconnected.


b. routing registry

Becca Nitzan (ESnet) echoed the need for simplicity as well as a mandatory
routing registry from the start.  She suggested at least contact, tunnel
info and prefix be required from all participants.

Gert Jan de Groot offerred the RIPE NCC routing registry service to start
with.  There was consensus to accept this offer.

Bill Manning noted that the RA db software could also handle this registry.


During this discussion there were several pointed comments about the need
to a concrete plan for the 6bone, and to move quickly.  This led to the
items e. and f. below.


Also during this discusson, Dmitri Haskins asked how he might become
involved by offerring Bay routers as backbone routers for the 6bone.  It
was felt that these offers should be made through the mailer (or directly
to appropriate groups) so that conversations could proceed appropriately in
either an open forum (thus for all to see) or in a private fashion when
specific agreements were being made.  It was felt that this would be
fairest to all router vendors and would serve to keep the process open and
above board.


c. how/when to use v4 compatible v6 addresses

Steve Deering renewed his suggestion of the prior evening's IPng meeting
that the convention of use for v4 compatible v6 addresses be that they are
reserved for use when there is no adjacent v6 routing.  In this sense these
addresses then act as a flag that the host is not v6 reachable.

Though there was much agreement on this point, there was controversy, and
in the interest of time it was agreed to continue the discussion of this
convention on the 6bone mailer.


d. v6 address assignment

There was consensus that RFC 1897 should be used for the assignment of
native IPv6 addresses for the 6bone.  As this format uses the IPv4 AS
(Autonomous System) number as part of its prefix, these addresses may be
self assigned.

This choice also avoids falling own the "rat hole" of politics over
provider-based v6 address assignment.


e. tunnelling

it was generally felt that to move the 6bone forward, an immediate effort
be made to get existing v6 "islands" interconnected with tunnels.  To
identify the possible "tunnellees", the meeting briefly moved to item 3 on
the agenda to understand possible participant status.


f. v6 testbed interconnect/regional process startup

After identifying the particpants able to immediately tunnel, it was agreed
that there be a lunchtime meeting (immediately after the Wed. morning IPng
meeting) to discuss the details.


3. Particpant Reports/Plans

a. ESnet
b. Dartnet
c. G6
d. Japan
e. RIPE
f. UNI-C

These reports were kept so brief as to be impossible to report here.  It
was clear that of the six above efforts, that the European and Japanes
efforts were already running "islands" of IPv6 and could participate
immediately in 6bone tunnelling agreements.

The chair noted that the UNI-C (Danish university) folk, using the Danish
Telebit routers, seemed to be the first to provide native v6 packet
transport for a production network.  Kudos to UNI-C!

ESnet and Dartnet have plans to be "6bone" ready later this summer.

The chair encouraged all the participants to post their reports and web
pointers on the 6bone mailer.


4. 6bone Regional Coordinators

a. Europe
b. Pacific Rim
c. US/Canada

There was no time for discussion of this item.


- end



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jun 26 08:10:30 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22681>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22673>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:35 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22869>; Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:34 -0700
Received: from [206.167.192.34] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with SMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:45 -0800
X-Sender:  (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v02140b00adf75fb33870@[206.167.192.34]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 1996 15:10:30 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: RLFink@lbl.gov (Bob Fink)
Subject: 6BONE first tunnel startup meeting report - 26 Jun 96 - Montreal
Cc: RLFink@LBL.gov (Bob Fink LBL), GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

As agreed at the 6bone unofficial BOF meeting yesterday, those interested
in immediate 6bone tunnel startup met after the Wed. morning IPng meeting
to discuss the procedure and details.

It was agreed that the WIDE/Japan, G6/France and UNI-C/Denmark IPv6
projects were ready to establish the very first 6bone tunnels.

A startup date of 15 July 1996 was agreed upon.

It was agreed that this process would start by the responsible person from
each project sending email to the 6bone mailer with their request to
establish manually configured tunnels with the other two.

Geert Jan de Groot (of the RIPE NCC) agreed to act as coordinator for this
effort.  It was felt that working out details on the mail list would work
best.

As agreed at the previous day's 6bone meeting, the RIPE-NCC will act as the
6bone Routing Registry.

Also, as agreed at the previous day's 6bone meeting, the  IPv6 Testing
Address Allocation format of RFC 1897 will be used.


Regards,

Bob Fink



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jul  1 05:33:44 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20192>; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 03:46:47 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20186>; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 03:46:44 -0700
Received: from ayla.tbit.dk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21347>; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 03:46:42 -0700
Received: from mdp.tbit.dk (mdp.tbit.dk [194.182.135.65]) by ayla.tbit.dk (8.6.11/8.6.11) with SMTP id MAA28824; Mon, 1 Jul 1996 12:25:34 +0200
Message-Id: <31D82818.45B2@tbit.dk>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 1996 12:33:44 -0700
From: Martin Peck <mdp@tbit.dk>
Organization: Telebit Communications
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Followup-To: ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM,6bone@ISI.EDU,smn
To: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Cc: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: New IPv6 Release
References: <v02140b0fadeceb77aac6@[205.226.1.20]>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------7E19389D242E"
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

--------------7E19389D242E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Bob,
Thanks for including us in your IPng page. Telebit Communications A/S now 
has a major new IPv6 router release which is detailed in the attachment 
(htm format, viewable from Netscape Mail).

Thanks in advance for updating our contribution,

Best Regards,
Martin Peck

--------------7E19389D242E
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="HINDEN2.HTM"

<BASE HREF="file:///C|/NETSCAPE/MAIL/HINDEN2.HTM">

<!doctype html public "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN">
<HTML>

<HEAD>

<TITLE>Bob,</TITLE>

<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Internet Assistant for Word 1.0Z">
<META NAME="AUTHOR" CONTENT="xxx">
</HEAD>

<BODY>

<H3><A HREF="http://www.tbit.dk">Telebit Communications A/S</A>
has released a major new IPv6 router implementation which has
been demonstrated at the <A HREF="http://www.join.uni-muenster.de/JOIN/ipv6/texte-englisch/informationsquellen.html">Joint European Networking Conference in Budapest</A>.
</H3>

<H3>This includes IDRPv6 for the exchange of routing information
between autonomous domains, IGP to dynamically exchange routing
information within domains, SNMP support for IPv6, facilities
to define static IPv6 routing information, neighbor discovery,
automatic and manually configured tunneling, accounting facilities
and packet filtering for both IPv4 and IPv6, a full ICMPv6 implementation,
IPv6 multicast generation and termination, and IPv6 ping and traceroutes.
We plan to make OSPFv6, RIPv6, neighbor discovery over ATM, and
RSVP (for IPv4 and IPv6) available by the end of '96, and support
of IPv6 multicasting in '97. </H3>

<H3>TELEBIT COMMUNICATIONS A/S </H3>

<H3>Tel: +45 86 28 81 76</H3>

<H3>fx: +45 86 28 81 86</H3>

<H3>em: info@tbit.dk</H3>

<H3><A HREF="http://www.tbit.dk">http://www.tbit.dk/</A> </H3>

<P>
 
</BODY>

</HTML>

--------------7E19389D242E--


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul  5 14:10:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17502>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 03:08:52 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17496>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 03:08:48 -0700
Received: from unidhp1.uni-c.dk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25521>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 03:08:46 -0700
Received: by unidhp1.uni-c.dk
	(1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA179351446; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 12:10:46 +0200
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 12:10:46 +0200 (METDST)
From: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
To: 6bone Mailer <6bone@ISI.EDU>
Cc: Herluf Hansen <hha@tbit.dk>, Inger Bohlbro <inb@tbit.dk>,
        Ole Carsten Pedersen <ole.carsten.pedersen@uni-c.dk>
Subject: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960705115944.17615D-100000@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

To WIDE, G6, Geert Jan de Groot

   This is the list of the DENET nodes which are ready to participate
in 6bone.

DENET 6bone nodes
-----------------

SUN station, femur.join.uni-c.dk,    ::130.225.231.4
             femur6.join.uni-c.dk,   5f07:2b00:82e1:e700:4:800:2020:dab4

SUN station, scapula.uni-c.dk,       ::130.225.231.2
             scapula6.join.uni-c.dk, 5f07:2b00:82e1:e700:2:800:2020:ab36

TBC router,  unvea.denet.dk,         ::130.225.231.5  
             unvea6.join.uni-c.dk,   5f07:2b00:82e1:e700:5:cccc:cccc:cccc

TBC router,  unlya.denet.dk,         ::130.225.249.12
             unlya6.join.uni-c.dk,   5f07:2b00:82e1:f900:2a:aaaa:aaaa:aaaa

TBC router,  unara.denet.dk,         ::130.225.246.130
             unara6.join.uni-c.dk    5f07:2b00:82e1:f600:82:bbbb:bbbb:bbbb

The ipv6 addresses have been defined according to the format described
in RFC1897. The DENET AS number is 1835.

unvea.denet.dk will act as the tunnel node.

The ipv6 DNS is running on femur.join.uni-c.dk.


regards,

---------------- oo000oo ----------------------------------
Gudrun Dalgeir             phone  : (+) 45 35878532
UNI-C                      fax    : (+) 45 35878890
Vermundsgade 5             e-mail : Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk
DK-2100 Kbh. O             
-----------------------------------------------------------


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul  5 15:37:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20370>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 06:04:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20364>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 06:04:41 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29936>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 06:04:39 -0700
Received: from brahma.imag.fr (brahma.imag.fr [129.88.30.10]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id NAA09221; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 13:37:54 +0200
From: Alain.Durand@imag.fr
Received: (from durand@localhost) by brahma.imag.fr (8.7/8.7) id NAA22214; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 13:37:54 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <9607051337.ZM22212@brahma.imag.fr>
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 1996 13:37:53 +0200
In-Reply-To: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
        "Tunnel request to WIDE and G6" (Jul  5, 12:10pm)
References: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960705115944.17615D-100000@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95)
To: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>,
        6bone Mailer <6bone@ISI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
Cc: Herluf Hansen <hha@tbit.dk>, Inger Bohlbro <inb@tbit.dk>,
        Ole Carsten Pedersen <ole.carsten.pedersen@uni-c.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Jul 5, 12:10pm, Gudrun R. Dalgeir wrote:
> Subject: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
> To WIDE, G6, Geert Jan de Groot
>
>    This is the list of the DENET nodes which are ready to participate
> in 6bone.
[...]
> TBC router,  unvea.denet.dk,         ::130.225.231.5
>              unvea6.join.uni-c.dk,   5f07:2b00:82e1:e700:5:cccc:cccc:cccc
>
[...]
> The ipv6 addresses have been defined according to the format described
> in RFC1897. The DENET AS number is 1835.
>
> unvea.denet.dk will act as the tunnel node.


Gudrun, which prefix do you want us to route to your tunnel node?
5f07:2b00::/32 or 5f07:2b00:82e1:e700::/64

For G6, the entry point will be ::129.88.26.1
The prefix to route will be 5f06:b500::/32

The machine 129.88.26.1 is already up and running, but as it's my
main ipv6 host, it will be replaced sometime next week by a dedicated host
running inria's code with the same IPv4 address.

They're several hosts you can ping or telnet to,
I'll send a complete list later.

Yours,


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul  6 22:50:08 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02791>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 21:57:02 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02785>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 21:56:51 -0700
Received: from trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28180>; Fri, 5 Jul 1996 21:56:15 -0700
Received: from sfc.wide.ad.jp by trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/2.7W)
	id EAA12435; Sat, 6 Jul 1996 04:50:12 GMT
Message-Id: <199607060450.EAA12435@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
To: unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, hha@tbit.dk, inb@tbit.dk, ole.carsten.pedersen@uni-c.dk
Subject: Re: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
Reply-To: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 5 Jul 1996 12:10:46 +0200 (METDST)"
References: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960705115944.17615D-100000@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 1996 13:50:08 +0900
From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJF8kSiRfJF4kNSQtGyhC?= (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

    Hi, everyone.

    This is Masaki Minami, WIDE Project, Japan.

    We are going to take place "IPv6 Meeting on WIDE Project"
at July 10(JST), now we are preparing to CONNECT to the "World
Wide 6Bone". So, I will inform you that the LIST of all addresses
on WIDE 6Bone.

Regards,

--------
// masaki //

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul 13 05:37:14 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27862>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:37:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27856>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:37:06 -0700
Received: from trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02955>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:37:04 -0700
Received: from sfc.wide.ad.jp by trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/2.7W)
	id MAA13074; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:36:41 GMT
Message-Id: <199607131236.MAA13074@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
To: unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, hha@tbit.dk, inb@tbit.dk, ole.carsten.pedersen@uni-c.dk
Subject: Re: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
Reply-To: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 06 Jul 1996 13:50:08 +0900"
References: <199607060450.EAA12435@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:36:38 +0900
From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJF8kSiRfJF4kNSQtGyhC?= (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

  Hi, everyone.

  The below is "6Bone Nodes Topology and Node Table" on 
WIDE Project, Japan. Now, we are ready to participate in 
Wolrd Wide 6Bone.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
  *********************************************************
  **                     6Bone nodes                     **
  **                  WIDE Project, Japan                **
  *********************************************************

Current Topology

  Osaka-U
+-----------------------------------+
|strawberry-jam.center.osaka-u.ac.jp|
|      5f09:c200:8504:c00::2        |
+-------------- | ------------------+
                S
  NAIST         S
    +---------- | -----------+
    | 5f09:c200:8504:c00::1  |         U-Tokyo               
    |   zeta.wide.ad.jp      |       +---------------------+
    | 5f09:c200:8504:1500::2 |       | pc1.nezu.wide.ad.jp |
    +---------- | -----------+    5f09:c200:8504:600::2    |
                S                     /--------------------+
  Tokyo         S                    S                      
  +------------ | -------------+    S                       
  |  5f09:c200:8504:1500::1    |   /
  |    pc1.tokyo.wide.ad.jp   5f09:c200:8504:600::1  
  |    5f09:c200:8504:0200::2  |
  +------------ |--------------+
                S
   SFC          S
     +--------- |-------------+
     | 5f09:c200:8504:0200::1 |
     |  globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp  |
     +-------------------  5f09:c200:8504:d00::1         
                                \
                                 S
                          Hitachi S
                               +-- \ --------------------+
                               |  5f09:c200:8504:d00::2  |
                               |eagle.isrd.hitachi.co.jp |
                               +-------------------------+

*******************************************************************
* Serial Line
*	5f09:c200:XXXX:XX00::{1,2}
*	XXXX:XX00 24bit from IPv4 Address
*	Prefixlen 80
*******************************************************************
Tokyo - NAIST (133.4.21.33 - 133.4.21.34/27)
	Tokyo:	5f09:c200:8504:1500::1
	NAIST:	5f09:c200:8504:1500::2

NAIST - Osaka (133.4.12.33 - 133.4.12.34/27)
	NAIST:	5f09:c200:8504:0c00::1
	Osaka:	5f09:c200:8504:0c00::2

SFC - Tokyo(133.4.2.33 - 133.4.2.34/27)
	SFC:	5f09:c200:8504:0200::1
	Tokyo: 	5f09:c200:8504:0200::2

Tokyo - U-Tokyo (133.4.6.33 - 133.4.6.34/27)
	Tokyo:	5f09:c200:8504:0600::1
      U-Tokyo:	5f09:c200:8504:0600::2

SFC - Hitachi (133.4.13.1 - 133.4.13.2/27)
	SFC:	5f09:c200:8504:0d00::1
      Hitachi:	5f09:c200:8504:0d00::2

*******************************************************************
* Ethernet
*	5f09:c200:XXXX:XX00:*******
*	XXXX:XX00:  24bits from IPv4 Address 
*	*******: MAC Address
* Example:
*	MAC Address of globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp is "00a0:2448:7a3c"
*       And IPv4 Address
*	So, IPv6 Address of globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp is
*		5f09:c200:851b::00a0:2448:7a3c
*******************************************************************
globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp
	5f09:c200:851b::00a0:2448:7a3c
eagle.isrd.hitachi.co.jp
	5f09:c200:8590::00a0:243a:6f7c	

-------------------------------------------------------------

  I wounder that we should decide the IPv6 Addresses that are
both of our and your tunnel I/F.

Regards,

		// masaki //

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul 13 05:59:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28099>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:59:00 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28093>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:58:55 -0700
Received: from trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03104>; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 05:58:52 -0700
Received: from sfc.wide.ad.jp by trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/2.7W)
	id MAA13182; Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:58:38 GMT
Message-Id: <199607131258.MAA13182@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
To: unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, hha@tbit.dk, inb@tbit.dk, ole.carsten.pedersen@uni-c.dk
Subject: Re: Tunnel request to WIDE and G6
Reply-To: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:36:38 +0900"
References: <199607131236.MAA13074@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:58:37 +0900
From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJF8kSiRfJF4kNSQtGyhC?= (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

  Everybody,

  Sorry, I had big mistake...... :p
  Please ignore the last message from me.

  This is correct "Topology and Nodes Table".

  Thanks,

	// masaki //

-----------------------------------------------------------
  *********************************************************
  **                     6Bone nodes                     **
  **                  WIDE Project, Japan                **
  *********************************************************

Current Topology

  Osaka-U
+-----------------------------------+
|strawberry-jam.center.osaka-u.ac.jp|
|      5f09:c400:8504:c00::2        |
+-------------- | ------------------+
                S
  NAIST         S
    +---------- | -----------+
    | 5f09:c400:8504:c00::1  |         U-Tokyo               
    |   zeta.wide.ad.jp      |       +---------------------+
    | 5f09:c400:8504:1500::2 |       | pc1.nezu.wide.ad.jp |
    +---------- | -----------+    5f09:c400:8504:600::2    |
                S                     /--------------------+
  Tokyo         S                    S                      
  +------------ | -------------+    S                       
  |  5f09:c400:8504:1500::1    |   /
  |    pc1.tokyo.wide.ad.jp   5f09:c400:8504:600::1  
  |    5f09:c400:8504:0200::2  |
  +------------ |--------------+
                S
   SFC          S
     +--------- |-------------+
     | 5f09:c400:8504:0200::1 |
     |  globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp  |
     +-------------------  5f09:c400:8504:d00::1         
                                \
                                 S
                          Hitachi S
                               +-- \ --------------------+
                               |  5f09:c400:8504:d00::2  |
                               |eagle.isrd.hitachi.co.jp |
                               +-------------------------+

*******************************************************************
* Serial Line
*	5f09:c400:XXXX:XX00::{1,2}
*	XXXX:XX00 24bit from IPv4 Address
*	Prefixlen 80
*******************************************************************
Tokyo - NAIST (133.4.21.33 - 133.4.21.34/27)
	Tokyo:	5f09:c400:8504:1500::1
	NAIST:	5f09:c400:8504:1500::2

NAIST - Osaka (133.4.12.33 - 133.4.12.34/27)
	NAIST:	5f09:c400:8504:0c00::1
	Osaka:	5f09:c400:8504:0c00::2

SFC - Tokyo(133.4.2.33 - 133.4.2.34/27)
	SFC:	5f09:c400:8504:0200::1
	Tokyo: 	5f09:c400:8504:0200::2

Tokyo - U-Tokyo (133.4.6.33 - 133.4.6.34/27)
	Tokyo:	5f09:c400:8504:0600::1
      U-Tokyo:	5f09:c400:8504:0600::2

SFC - Hitachi (133.4.13.1 - 133.4.13.2/27)
	SFC:	5f09:c400:8504:0d00::1
      Hitachi:	5f09:c400:8504:0d00::2

*******************************************************************
* Ethernet
*	5f09:c400:XXXX:XX00:*******
*	XXXX:XX00:  24bits from IPv4 Address 
*	*******: MAC Address
* Example:
*	MAC Address of globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp is "00a0:2448:7a3c"
*       And IPv4 Address
*	So, IPv6 Address of globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp is
*		5f09:c400:851b::00a0:2448:7a3c
*******************************************************************
globe.sfc.wide.ad.jp
	5f09:c400:851b::00a0:2448:7a3c
eagle.isrd.hitachi.co.jp
	5f09:c400:8590::00a0:243a:6f7c	


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 16 10:43:23 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16169>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 09:46:16 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16156>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 09:46:14 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA18296>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 09:46:12 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id BAA05233; Tue, 16 Jul 1996 01:46:10 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id QAA00889; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 16:43:23 GMT
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: 6/15
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 1996 01:43:23 +0900
Message-Id: <886.837449003@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi 6bone guys,

We've waited for the entire arrangement on this list, though, nothing
is mentioned. So, let me say something.

Today, Alian, a G6 guy, contacted us to set up a v6-over-v4 tunnel
between France and Japan. Since he has left for Pari, I couldn't
confirm.  But I guess he tried to use an *automatic tunneling*. That
is, the destination and source IPv6 address of the payload must be
IPv4-compatible-IPv6 address.

We believe that we must not use IPv4-compatible-IPv6 addresses on the
6bone. Rather, all IPv6 address must be test address. 

Anyway, WIDE is now ready. Our tunnel end point is
"june.aist-nara.ac.jp"(163.221.11.21). All nodes on the WIDE IPv6
network has a prefix 5f09:c400::/32.

If you would like to set up a v6-over-v4 tunnel to the WIDE IPv6
network, please post to this ML. We believe that an appropriate tunnel
addressing is as follows:

    5f09:c400:a3dd:400::1       5f09:c400:a3dd:400::2
   june <------- v6 over v4 tunnel---------> yours
     |                                         |
    -+-                                       -+-
163.221.11.21                                any IPv4 addr

P.S.

You can get the entire topology of the WIDE IPv6 network from:
"http://www.wide.ad.jp/wg/ipv6/"

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jul 15 03:37:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19718>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:40:37 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19711>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:40:35 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21470>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:39:45 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15717(2)>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:38:22 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:37:43 PDT
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?= <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: 6/15 
In-Reply-To: kazu's message of Mon, 15 Jul 96 09:43:23 -0800.
             <886.837449003@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 1996 10:37:42 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul15.103743pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kazu,

> We believe that we must not use IPv4-compatible-IPv6 addresses on the
> 6bone. Rather, all IPv6 address must be test address. 

That's correct, with one tiny exception: an IPv6 host with no neighboring
IPv6 router may use an IPv4-compatible IPv6 address for itself; as soon
as a neighboring IPv6 router is installed, the host must switch to using
IPv6 "native" addresses (e.g., the test addresses).

Automatic tunelling is not to be used between routers, only between a router
and an isolated host.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 03:58:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05633>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 02:58:24 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05627>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 02:58:23 -0700
Received: from trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA18725>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 02:58:19 -0700
Received: from sfc.wide.ad.jp by trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/2.7W)
	id JAA17606; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 09:58:05 GMT
Message-Id: <199607180958.JAA17606@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: 6Bone Status 
Reply-To: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 18:58:04 +0900
From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJF8kSiRfJF4kNSQtGyhC?= (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

  Folks,

  Tunnel Link between WIDE and G6 is now UP at " Thu Jul 18 16:11:29
JST 1996".
  And we are ready to set the Tunnel Link between WIDE and UNI-C up.

  By the way, we, WIDE Project are going to take place the
IPv6 demonstration on Interop, Tokyo.  It is between July, 24 and July
26. You know, some company which is developing IPv6 protocol suite will 
join it. 
   We will introduce the "World Wide 6Bone" and show the "ping" and 
"telnet" DEMO that are toward "World Wide 6Bone".

Regards,
		Masaki Minami, WIDE Project, Japan

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jul 18 02:12:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07653>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 05:47:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07646>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 05:47:40 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20752>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 05:47:29 -0700
Received: from rama.imag.fr (rama.imag.fr [129.88.30.9]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id OAA10459; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 14:47:08 +0200
Received: (from durand@localhost) by rama.imag.fr (8.6.10/8.6.9) id AAA08500; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 00:12:48 +0200
From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Message-Id: <960718001248.ZM8502@rama.imag.fr>
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 00:12:48 +0200
In-Reply-To: ( Text in unknown character set iso-2022-jp not shown )  (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
        "6Bone Status" (Jul 18,  6:58pm)
References: <199607180958.JAA17606@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.514 14may96)
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: 6Bone Status
Cc: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp, g6@imag.fr, v6@wide.ad.jp
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Folks,

I would like to inform you that the tunnel between G6 and UNI-C
is UP since last friday. The tunnel with WIDE is also UP.

Inside G6, hosts in the ipv6.imag.fr and ipv6.inria.fr are reachable,
the other G6 domains will be connected soon.

The 6-bone is starting!

	- Alain.

                                                                        ^_^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   U  (* *)
Alain DURAND                       |  Preserve keyboards:           |  ( v )
I.M.A.G.                           |     use completion.            |  /~~~\
Direction des Moyens Informatiques |-----------------------------  <|=< BSD >=
BP 53 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9       | E-Mail: Alain.Durand@imag.fr   |  \   /
France                             | Phone: +33 76 63 57 03         |   <~~<
Postmaster@imag.fr                 | Fax:   +33 76 51 49 64            ~   ~

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jul 18 00:56:34 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10210>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 07:56:44 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10204>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 07:56:42 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25899>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 07:56:41 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Thu, 18 Jul 1996 07:56:39 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007600ae1400502b7e@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 07:56:34 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: congratulations@lbl.gov
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Congratulations to the WIDE/Japan, G6/France and UNI-C/Denmark groups for
putting together the first "official" 6bone connections!

We are on our way!


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jul 18 01:01:14 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10360>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:02:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10340>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:02:04 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA26158>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:01:42 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15180(1)>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:01:32 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:01:15 PDT
To: v6@wide.ad.jp, g6@imag.fr
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: 6Bone Status 
In-Reply-To: Alain.Durand's message of Wed, 17 Jul 96 15:12:48 -0800.
             <960718001248.ZM8502@rama.imag.fr> 
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:01:14 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul18.080115pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> The 6-bone is starting!

Congratulations, WIDE, G6, and UNI-C!

Is anyone maintaining a map of 6bone?

Good luck with the Interop Tokyo demos.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jul 18 08:38:03 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01213>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:38:12 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01207>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:38:10 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA19957>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:38:09 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:38:09 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007601ae146c1f816b@[131.243.112.98]>
In-Reply-To: <96Jul18.080115pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
References: Alain.Durand's message of Wed, 17 Jul 96 15:12:48 -0800.      
       <960718001248.ZM8502@rama.imag.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 15:38:03 -0700
To: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6Bone Status
Cc: v6@wide.ad.jp, g6@imag.fr, 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Steve,

>> The 6-bone is starting!
>
>Congratulations, WIDE, G6, and UNI-C!
>
>Is anyone maintaining a map of 6bone?

I had asked Geert Jan de Groot if he could include long/lat in the routing
registry so we could possibly do this automatically in the future.

Meanwhile, I hope to provide at least a rudimentary map for the 6bone web
pages when I'm back from vacation next week (we'll see how that flies in
the face of not having been in the office since before the Montreal IETF
:-).

Outside of simple network names, what should be shown on the map?  All
ideas appreciated.


Would like to hear from Geert on this as he might have his own ideas on
what to do.  At any rate, something should be done soon (and referenced
thru the 6bone web site at a minimum).


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 21:43:10 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10674>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 20:43:39 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10662>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 20:43:37 -0700
Received: from trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04521>; Thu, 18 Jul 1996 20:43:35 -0700
Received: from sfc.wide.ad.jp by trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp (8.7.5+2.6Wbeta6/2.7W)
	id DAA23474; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 03:43:11 GMT
Message-Id: <199607190343.DAA23474@trf.sfc.wide.ad.jp>
To: deering@parc.xerox.com
Cc: v6@wide.ad.jp, g6@imag.fr, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Status 
Reply-To: minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 18 Jul 1996 08:01:14 PDT"
References: <96Jul18.080115pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 12:43:10 +0900
From: =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCJF8kSiRfJF4kNSQtGyhC?= (Masaki Minami) <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

    >> The 6-bone is starting!

    Steve> Congratulations, WIDE, G6, and UNI-C!

    Steve> Is anyone maintaining a map of 6bone?

  You can get the map which shows "WIDE 6Bone" topology from
our WEB page.

	http://www.wide.ad.jp/wg/ipv6/index.html

    Steve> Good luck with the Interop Tokyo demos.

  Thanks, Steve.

		Masaki Minami, WIDE Project, Japan

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 07:17:36 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22090>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:17:42 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22084>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:17:39 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23234>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:17:37 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id LAA11870; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 11:20:21 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA02684; Fri, 19 Jul 96 11:17:36 EDT
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 96 11:17:36 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9607191517.AA02684@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: where to get an IPv6 prefix
Cc: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi,

Would some one please to remind me what is the established procedure for getting
a routable IPv6 prefix? We (Bay) would like to get connected to 6bone
(as a stab site at this point).

Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 01:46:57 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22837>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:45:04 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22831>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:45:03 -0700
Received: from mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (foo-5-10.Ipsilon.COM) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24464>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:45:02 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id IAA19922; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:44:54 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v03007802ae155e3b0cad@[205.226.1.20]>
In-Reply-To: <9607191517.AA02684@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 08:46:57 -0700
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: Re: where to get an IPv6 prefix
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dimitry,

>Would some one please to remind me what is the established procedure for
>getting
>a routable IPv6 prefix? We (Bay) would like to get connected to 6bone
>(as a stab site at this point).

Use the algorithm in RFC1897 "IPv6 Testing Address Allocation".

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 13:40:35 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10300>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 14:40:41 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10294>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 14:40:40 -0700
Received: from cs.unh.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA13041>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 14:40:39 -0700
Received: from agate.cs.unh.edu by cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA21714; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:40:37 -0400
Received: by agate.cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA17574; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:40:36 -0400
From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Message-Id: <199607192140.RAA17574@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Subject: tunnel request
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6bone m-list)
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:40:35 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi G6, WIDE and UNI-C,

This is a tunnel request from (UNH, BAY, DEC).

Our prefix is 5f02:3000::/32

Our tunnel endpoint is ::132.177.118.22

The machines you can currently ping are :

5f02:3000:84b1:7600::800:912:241a
and
5f02:3000:84b1:7600::800:5add:2217


I will post the entire topology later.  

Is it OK if I request tunnels to more than one prefix, the reason being that the general
5f02:3000::/32 covers all subnets under our autonomous system number, over which I 
don't have much control.

I can ping UNI-C and G6 tunnel endpoint v4-compatible address but I can't ping
WIDE's tunnel endpoint at ::163.221.11.21 . 

Can G6 supply me with some global IPv6 addresses to ping to.

Quaizar
------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Jul 19 15:28:25 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15886>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:28:28 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15880>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:28:27 -0700
Received: from home.merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17945>; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 16:28:26 -0700
Received: from localhost (masaki@localhost) by home.merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id TAA27219; Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:28:26 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199607192328.TAA27219@home.merit.edu>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: labovit@merit.edu
Subject: How to configure a tunnel
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:28:25 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folks,

Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.

I tried to use solaris ipv6 first, but it seems to support only
automatic tunneling. I next tried to check freebsd INRIA version,
which supports automatic tunneling, but I'm not sure if it
supports configured tunneling.

By the way, I sent the following message before, but it seems not
to reach at the 6bone mailing-list. I don't know the
reason. Anyway, we're going to join 6bone when we are ready.

Masaki

To: 6bone@isi.edu
cc: GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net
Cc: labovit@merit.edu
Subject: Join 6bone
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 1996 14:14:52 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>

6bone folks,

I heard from Jun about 6bone after IETF meeting in Montreal was
over. Craig Labovitz and I at Merit are much interested in
joining 6bone in order to run MRT (Multi-threaded Routing
Toolkit), which supports RIPng now, under real & wider v6
environment. I'd like to know who I should ask to connect our v6
island to the 6bone. Thanks.

Masaki Hirabaru
a member of WIDE Project
but currently with Merit

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul 20 13:22:20 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03605>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:27:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03599>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:27:47 -0700
Received: from calypso.urec.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04440>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:27:45 -0700
Received: from phoebe.urec.fr by calypso.urec.fr
	  (8.6.10/urec-1.0) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:27:16 +0200
Received: by phoebe.urec.fr
	  (8.6.9/urec-0.9); Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:22:20 +0200
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:22:20 +0200
From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Message-Id: <199607200922.LAA13457@phoebe.urec.fr>
To: masaki@merit.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel
Cc: labovit@merit.edu, 6bone@isi.edu
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO



|   Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:28:25 -0400
|   From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
|   
|   Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
|   implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.
|   
|   I tried to use solaris ipv6 first, but it seems to support only
|   automatic tunneling. I next tried to check freebsd INRIA version,
|   which supports automatic tunneling, but I'm not sure if it
|   supports configured tunneling.

====BT: Yes it does! since we -G6/France- and some others right now are
	running it for that purpose.

|   (...) Anyway, we're going to join 6bone when we are ready.

====BT: Welcome to the -still- small 6bone operations' group

|   (...) Craig Labovitz and I at Merit are much interested in
|   joining 6bone in order to run MRT (Multi-threaded Routing
|   Toolkit), which supports RIPng now, under real & wider v6
|   environment.

====BT: Fine. Is your code freely available to play with ?


|   I'd like to know who I should ask to connect our v6
|   island to the 6bone. Thanks.

====BT: to connect to G6/France, please ask Alain.Durand@imag.fr
	to connect to WIDE/Japan, ask minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp
	to connect to Uni-C/Denmark, ask unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk

	In fact, the 6bone@ISI.EDU mailing list is the right place to 
	reach everybody you need to connect to, since it'll become 
	painful to enumerate email addresses for all ipv6 clouds
	connected all around the world...

  Cheers,

  +Bernard Tuy.
    G6/France

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul 20 13:31:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03707>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:37:10 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03701>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:37:09 -0700
Received: from calypso.urec.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04518>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 02:37:08 -0700
Received: from phoebe.urec.fr by calypso.urec.fr
	  (8.6.10/urec-1.0) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:36:35 +0200
Received: by phoebe.urec.fr
	  (8.6.9/urec-0.9); Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:31:39 +0200
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:31:39 +0200
From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Message-Id: <199607200931.LAA13465@phoebe.urec.fr>
To: qv@cs.unh.edu
Subject: Re: tunnel request
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


|   From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
|   Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 17:40:35 -0400 (EDT)
|   
|   This is a tunnel request from (UNH, BAY, DEC).
|   Our prefix is 5f02:3000::/32
|   Our tunnel endpoint is ::132.177.118.22   
|   I will post the entire topology later.  
|   
====BT: Ok. It'd be nice to have a HTML page describing your IPv6 activities in
	general, and your IPv6 topology in particular.

|   
|   I can ping UNI-C and G6 tunnel endpoint v4-compatible address but I can't ping
|   WIDE's tunnel endpoint at ::163.221.11.21 . 

====BT: I've right now the same problem...

|   
|   Can G6 supply me with some global IPv6 addresses to ping to.

====BT: for sure. Please refer to http://www.urec.fr/IPv6/G6-english.html 
	(item "more detailed pictures")

  +Bernard Tuy.
    G6/France

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Jul 20 00:44:33 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06739>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 07:44:43 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06733>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 07:44:42 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09855>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 07:44:41 -0700
Received: from [131.243.112.98] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Sat, 20 Jul 1996 07:44:37 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007600ae169d365daa@[131.243.112.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 07:44:33 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: more tunnels and what to do next
Cc: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra), Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Two new groups have now asked for a tunnel to the 6bone via the 6bone list
(Merit and the UNH/Bay/DEC consortium), and one to me privately (Dqavid
Meyer, Univ. of Oregon).

As I remember our plan from Montreal, we decided to use the G6/Wide/UNI-C
folk as the trial 6bone setup to test out Geert Jan's routing registry,
various 6bone operational issues, and whatever else came up in preparation
to moving beyond these first three networks.  I still think this is a good
idea.

So, I would propose that we wait to hear from Geert Jan (he was about to
send something to the list on the registry early next week), as well as
having some open discussion on this list (hopefully also during the next
week) about how we should handle requests, how to decide where and how
tunnels get built, etc..

Also, we are trying to learn from the MBONE experience so I want to hear
from Steve Deering as well as to how he thinks what has gone on so far fits
with what his experience with the mBONE has been.

I'm concerned that if we don't move fairly carefully as tunnel requests
come in we could end up with a messy mesh on our hands :-)

Again, thanks to the G6/Wide/UNI-C folk for being the testers of all this.
The 6bone is really poised to help the Internet's conversion to v6 (albeit
over a long period of time).


Thanks,

Bob




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Jul 21 09:47:21 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07343>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 08:47:27 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07337>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 08:47:24 -0700
Received: from itojun.csl.sony.co.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA11051>; Sat, 20 Jul 1996 08:47:22 -0700
Received: from localhost (itojun@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by itojun.csl.sony.co.jp (8.7.5/3.3W3) with ESMTP id AAA00518; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 00:47:21 +0900 (JST)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: niv6@is.aist-nara.ac.jp
Reply-To: niv6@is.aist-nara.ac.jp
Subject: could you please set-up V6 httpd NetWorld+Interop96 tokyo demo?
Dont-Reply-To: itojun@itojun.csl.sony.co.jp
Dont-Return-Receipt-To: itojun@csl.sony.co.jp
X-Pgp-Fingerprint: F8 24 B4 2C 8C 98 57 FD  90 5F B4 60 79 54 16 E2
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 00:47:21 +0900
Message-Id: <515.837877641@itojun.csl.sony.co.jp>
From: Jun-ichiro Itoh <itojun@csl.sony.co.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

	Hello, this is Jun-ichiro Itoh of Sony CSL/Keio Univ.
	We are trying to demonstrate 6bone and IPv6 at NetWorld+Interop96
	which will be held next week, at tokyo.

	For demonstration, we would like to let the visitors play with
	IPv6-ready Mosaic, for demonstrating 6bone availability at this moment.
	So, apparently we need some IPv6-ready httpd servers on the 6bone.

	If you are already connected to Japanese 6bone (which is operated
	by WIDE project), and you are so kind to donate some CPU power for
	IPv6-ready httpd, could you please contact us? (niv6@is.aist-nara.ac.jp)
	1. If you already have IPv6-ready httpd, please let me know
	   IPv6 address/doain name for your http server.
	2. If you do not have IPv6-ready httpd, don't worry!
	   If you have inet6d, you can use very trivial httpd we have
	   implemented.  It should be able to run on any UNIX-based boxes.
	   Contact us for the source code.  Installation phase is also
	   very trivial!

	Thanks for your future cooperation!

itojun@csl.sony.co.jp
Jun-ichiro Itoh

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Jul 21 16:00:35 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08355>; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 17:15:19 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08331>; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 17:15:01 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03001>; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 17:14:52 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id UAA16269; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 20:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA00038; Sun, 21 Jul 1996 20:00:36 -0400
Message-Id: <9607220000.AA00038@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra),
        Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 20 Jul 96 07:44:33 PDT."
             <v03007600ae169d365daa@[131.243.112.98]> 
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 96 20:00:35 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

I agree.  But we cannot hold up the proliferation of the 6-bone I don't
think for long if there is a single point of failure.  Using RFC 1897 we
can build the addresses but it better for now if Geert is in the loop.

So if someone wants to send sipper.pa-x.dec.com an IPv6 packet they must
go through Europe as opposed to the UNH-BAY-DEC point?  If so that is
not a good idea???

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jul 22 09:16:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05457>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 10:16:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05446>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 10:16:45 -0700
Received: from home.merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29341>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 10:16:42 -0700
Received: from localhost (masaki@localhost) by home.merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id NAA24245; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:16:40 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199607221716.NAA24245@home.merit.edu>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: labovit@merit.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:28:25 EDT."
             <199607192328.TAA27219@home.merit.edu> 
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:16:39 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi. 6bone folks,

My question was:
> Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
> implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.

The answers are:
INRIA, NRL, and Linux versions support configured tunneling.
Solaris version seems not to support it now.

So, I'm going to figure out how to configure it under INRIA
version we've currently installed. I'm asking Francis Dupont.

>> |   (...) Craig Labovitz and I at Merit are much interested in
>> |   joining 6bone in order to run MRT (Multi-threaded Routing
>> |   Toolkit), which supports RIPng now, under real & wider v6
>> |   environment.
>> 
>> ====BT: Fine. Is your code freely available to play with ?

If you are interested, please see http://compute.merit.edu/mrt/.
Yes, it's freely available. The current released version has
implemented the basic part of ripng, and the next release will
have a lot of improvements.

Thank you for responding my query. The following is its summary.

Masaki Hirabaru
Merit
---

Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 01:56:47 +0100
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>

I know that both NRL and Linux support configured tunneling.
On Linux you have to bring the tunneling device up and then just do
route add prefix gw ::ddd.ddd.ddd.ddd

(the tunnel device just needs an ifconfig up, it will try to detect
your v4 addresses and configure them as v4-compat) 

./Pedro.

From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:22:20 +0200

====BT: Yes it does! since we -G6/France- and some others right now are
	running it for that purpose.

  +Bernard Tuy.
    G6/France

From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 17:16:56 +0200

=> according to my G6 colleagues, the Solaris implementation
doesn't support configured tunneling (exactly the routed
prefix must be an IPv4-compatible one).

=> My implementations support both automatic (via a direct cloning
route for the ::/96 prefix) and configured tunnels (just create
a route with an IPv4-compatible gateway).

Thanks

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

Date: Sun, 21 Jul 1996 13:27:34 -0400
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel

	The NRL IPv6 code will happily do configured tunnels, optionally
with authentication and encryption.

							-Craig

--

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jul 22 11:41:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13580>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:03:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13539>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:01:06 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08619>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:01:02 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id PAA23917; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:41:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA01587; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:41:53 -0400
Message-Id: <9607221941.AA01587@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, labovit@merit.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 Jul 96 13:16:39 EDT."
             <199607221716.NAA24245@home.merit.edu> 
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 15:41:53 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


>My question was:
>> Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
>> implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.
>
>The answers are:
>INRIA, NRL, and Linux versions support configured tunneling.
>Solaris version seems not to support it now.

Digital UNIX and Digital Routers (WGE and Routabout) also support
configured tunneling too.  We also have RIPv2v6 working too.

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Jul 22 11:41:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13580>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:03:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13539>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:01:06 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08619>; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:01:02 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id PAA23917; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:41:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA01587; Mon, 22 Jul 1996 15:41:53 -0400
Message-Id: <9607221941.AA01587@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, labovit@merit.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 Jul 96 13:16:39 EDT."
             <199607221716.NAA24245@home.merit.edu> 
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 96 15:41:53 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


>My question was:
>> Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
>> implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.
>
>The answers are:
>INRIA, NRL, and Linux versions support configured tunneling.
>Solaris version seems not to support it now.

Digital UNIX and Digital Routers (WGE and Routabout) also support
configured tunneling too.  We also have RIPv2v6 working too.

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 23 10:08:44 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26571>; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 17:09:35 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26565>; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 17:09:33 -0700
Received: from hershey.es.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21666>; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 17:09:33 -0700
Received: from LOCALHOST (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by hershey.es.net (LBNLMWH3/8.7.5/ESNET-Feb96) with SMTP id RAA24640 for 6bone@ISI.EDU; Tue, 23 Jul 1996 17:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199607240008.RAA24640@hershey.es.net>
X-Authentication-Warning: hershey.es.net: Host LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: ESnet tunnel up
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 96 17:08:44 -0700
From: "Rebecca L. Nitzan" <nitzan@es.net>
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi:

    We have a host up on the 6bone routed via Cisco at the
moment. Hopefully next week we'll be able to forward v6 
traffic through this tunnel endpoint. So far I can ping the 
following hosts:

NRL:    5f00:3000:84fa:0000:0000:0000:0000:0001
NRL:    5f00:3000:84fa:0000:0000:0000:0000:0002
NRL:    5f00:3000:84fa:0000:0000:0000:0000:0003
NRL:    5f00:3000:84fa:0000:0000:0000:0000:0004
PEDRO:  5f0c:b300:c043:4c00:0001:0000:0000:0002
CISCO:  5f00:6d00:c01f:0700:0003:0000:0000:0001



 ------------------                                 -----------------------
|                  |    ........    ...........    |                        |
| tw2.es.net       |---: ESnet  :--: bbnplanet :---| 6bone-router.cisco.com |
| Dec Alpha        |   : AS293  :  : AS1       :   | Cisco                  |
| LBL California   |    ........    ...........    | PA area                |
 ------------------                                 ------------------------
                   |                               |
                   |<------v6 over v4 tunnel------>|

                   ====> traffic defaults via Cisco


tw2.es.net      ipv6 address = 5f01:2500:c680:400:0:800:2bbc:4cc3





			-- Becca

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rebecca L. Nitzan                        Lawrence Berkeley National Lab
Network Engineering Services Group       1 Cyclotron Rd, 50A/3101 MS 50C
ESnet - Energy Sciences Network          Berkeley, CA. 94720
phone: 510-486-6468 fax: 510-486-4300    nitzan@es.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Jul 25 15:14:17 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22923>; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 16:14:21 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22917>; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 16:14:19 -0700
Received: from home.merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09905>; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 16:14:19 -0700
Received: from localhost (masaki@localhost) by home.merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id TAA22654; Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:14:17 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199607252314.TAA22654@home.merit.edu>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: labovit@merit.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:22:20 +0200."
             <199607200922.LAA13457@phoebe.urec.fr> 
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:14:17 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folks,

Bernard Tuy writes,
> |   automatic tunneling. I next tried to check freebsd INRIA version,
> |   which supports automatic tunneling, but I'm not sure if it
> |   supports configured tunneling.
> 
> ====BT: Yes it does! since we -G6/France- and some others right now are
> 	running it for that purpose.

After exchanging a couple of messages with Francis Dupont, we
finally found that one file (netinet/in.c) had been missing in
the released package of INRIA ipv6 for freebsd. It was very tiny
modification, but confused me. I attached a diff based on
Francis's information.

So, Merit has become completely ready for making a tunnel to
6bone now. I'm waiting.

For making a private (non-routable) ipv6 testing prefix for the
private part of Merit ipv6 testbed network, we may use one of
private AS numbers.

FYI: Here is our /etc/rc.ipv6 on a INRIA ipv6 freebsd machine.
Plese note if you have more than two interfaces, you have to add
"options MULTI_HOMED" and "pseudo-device llink" in your kernel
configuration in this release. And also, in order to use lnc and
ep devices under ipv6, you have to modify these driver source
codes.

#! /bin/sh
autoconf6 -v
ifconfig lnc0 inet6 5f00:ed00:c66c:3c00::153 prefixlen 80 alias
ifconfig lnc0 inet6 first 5f00:ed00:c66c:3c00::153 prefixlen 80
ifconfig ep0 inet6 5f00:ed00:c0a8:0c00::153/80 prefixlen 80 alias
ifconfig ep0 inet6 first 5f00:ed00:c0a8:0c00::153/80 prefixlen 80
sysctl -w net.inet6.ipv6.forwarding=1
ndpd-router
route -n add -inet6 -net 5f00:ed00:c0a8:0a00::/80 ::192.168.10.103

The last line is making a configured tunnel to 192.168.10.103
which is on 5f00:ed00:c0a8:0a00::/80.

Masaki Hirabaru
Merit

*** in.c.orig   Sat Jul 22 23:38:11 1995
--- in.c        Wed Jul 24 15:10:35 1996
***************
*** 209,220 ****
--- 209,222 ----
                                    ifra->ifra_addr.sin_addr.s_addr)
                                        break;
                        }
+ #ifndef INET6
                        if ((ifp->if_flags & IFF_POINTOPOINT)
                            && (cmd == SIOCAIFADDR)
                            &&
(ifra->ifra_dstaddr.sin_addr.s_addr
                                == INADDR_ANY)) {
                                return EDESTADDRREQ;
                        }
+ #endif
                }
                if (cmd == SIOCDIFADDR && ia == 0)
                        return (EADDRNOTAVAIL);

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 04:54:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14745>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:59:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14739>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:58:58 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27541>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:58:52 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id TAA12351; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:56:53 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id KAA12257; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 10:54:09 GMT
To: 6bone@isi.edu, IPv6Imp@munnari.oz.au
Cc: v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:54:09 +0900
Message-Id: <12254.838724049@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi all,

I would like to report a big success of "Solution Showcase
Demonstration" at NetWorld+Interop 96 Tokyo. As you know, we WIDE
project opened one booth for IPv6 at SSD area through 7/24 to 7/26 at
Makuhari messe, Japan.

Four companies(Hitachi, SEI, Fujitsu, and DEC) and two
universities(NAIST, Keio) got together to show their own
implementations. We demonstrated:
	1) 6bone connectivity with Web
	2) IPv4 and IPv6 interaction(dual stack and translator) with NV
	3) Plug and Play

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 04:06:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13983>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:10:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13976>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:09:36 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA26959>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 03:09:25 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id TAA09374; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:08:58 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id KAA12136; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 10:06:09 GMT
To: masaki@merit.edu
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:16:39 -0400"
References: <199607221716.NAA24245@home.merit.edu>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:06:09 +0900
Message-Id: <12133.838721169@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Sorry for my late response. I have been stacked in Interop Tokyo.

From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 13:16:39 -0400

> > Hi. I'd like to know how to configure a tunnel to 6bone or which
> > implementation freely available supports configured tunneling.
> 
> The answers are:
> INRIA, NRL, and Linux versions support configured tunneling.
> Solaris version seems not to support it now.
> 
> So, I'm going to figure out how to configure it under INRIA
> version we've currently installed. I'm asking Francis Dupont.

Gee. Why don't you, a member of WIDE project, use one of WIDE
implementations? Actually Nara implementation provides a good and
generic tunneling model. Currently you can make a tunnel for v6 in v6,
v6 in v4, v4 in v6, v4 in v4 and I will support ESP and AH soon.

If you have BSD/OS 2.0, please let me know. Mr. Shima will port the
BSD/OS version to FreeBSD soon.

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 30 01:32:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19629>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:31:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19623>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:31:13 -0700
Received: from mailhost.ipsilon.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06273>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:31:12 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id IAA25471; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:30:51 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v03007807ae23db5b49e2@[205.226.1.20]>
In-Reply-To: <12254.838724049@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:32:48 -0700
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: Re: [IPv6Imp] SSD v6 at N+I tokyo
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, IPv6Imp@munnari.OZ.AU, v6@wide.ad.jp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kazu,

>I would like to report a big success of "Solution Showcase
>Demonstration" at NetWorld+Interop 96 Tokyo. As you know, we WIDE
>project opened one booth for IPv6 at SSD area through 7/24 to 7/26 at
>Makuhari messe, Japan.

Congratulations to all involved!  Very nice work!

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 30 10:05:26 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28333>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:33:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28327>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:33:17 -0700
Received: from bnl.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14584>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:33:16 -0700
Received: from corvus.ccd.bnl.gov. (corvus.ccd.bnl.gov [130.199.130.247]) by bnl.gov (8.7.5/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA16887 for <6bone@ISI.EDU>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:39:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from corvus.ccd.bnl.gov (localhost) by corvus.ccd.bnl.gov. (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA00131; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 14:05:26 -0400
Message-Id: <31FE4EE6.5D3F@bnl.gov>
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 14:05:26 -0400
From: Tom Nepsee <nepsee@bnl.gov>
Organization: CCD Network Services
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.4 sun4m)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Cc: nepsee@bnl.gov
Subject: IPv6 for Linux ?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hello,
  Does anyone know where I can get a Linux implementation of IPv6?  If
possible, I would like to run a SUN SPARC version of Linux with ipv6.
Thanks for your help.

-- 
===============================================================
Tom Nepsee                            nepsee@bnl.gov
Network Services                      (516) 344-3886
Brookhaven National Laboratory
===============================================================

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 30 20:39:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28523>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:43:46 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28514>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:43:41 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14863>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:43:40 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id AAA28105; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 00:39:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA27930; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 00:39:48 -0400
Message-Id: <9607310439.AA27930@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=    <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, IPv6Imp@munnari.oz.au, v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 Jul 96 19:54:09 +0900."
             <12254.838724049@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 00:39:48 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

REally good job and progress.  I wonder if NV app can be an app we can
use as a means to show IPv6 worldwide?

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 22:56:13 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28889>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:59:23 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28883>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:59:21 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA15358>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 21:59:19 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id NAA00445; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:58:58 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id EAA12840; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 04:56:13 GMT
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, IPv6Imp@munnari.oz.au, v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 00:39:48 -0400"
References: <9607310439.AA27930@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:56:13 +0900
Message-Id: <12837.838788973@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jim,

From: bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 00:39:48 -0400

> REally good job and progress.  I wonder if NV app can be an app we can
> use as a means to show IPv6 worldwide?

The reason why we made use of NV is visibility of communication
between v6 and v4. Perhaps telnet or ping are enough to prove
connectivity but they are not appealing to attendees. Please keep in
mind that all attendees are not engineer.

P.S.

Content of NV was Jun Murai... :)

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 30 21:14:36 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29399>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:17:59 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29393>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:17:58 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16177>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:17:57 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id BAA25746; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 01:14:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA28505; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 01:14:37 -0400
Message-Id: <9607310514.AA28505@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Tom Nepsee <nepsee@bnl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: IPv6 for Linux ? 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 Jul 96 14:05:26 EDT."
             <31FE4EE6.5D3F@bnl.gov> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 01:14:36 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Contact Pedro Roque at roque@di.fc.ul.pt
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Jul 30 21:20:40 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29596>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:27:27 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29590>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:27:26 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16463>; Tue, 30 Jul 1996 22:27:25 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id BAA20823; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 01:20:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA28617; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 01:20:40 -0400
Message-Id: <9607310520.AA28617@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=    <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com, 6bone@isi.edu, IPv6Imp@munnari.oz.au, v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 13:56:13 +0900."
             <12837.838788973@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 01:20:40 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kazu,

>> REally good job and progress.  I wonder if NV app can be an app we can
>> use as a means to show IPv6 worldwide?
>
>The reason why we made use of NV is visibility of communication
>>between v6 and v4. Perhaps telnet or ping are enough to prove
>connectivity but they are not appealing to attendees. Please keep in
>mind that all attendees are not engineer.
>
>P.S.
>
>Content of NV was Jun Murai... :)
>
>--Kazu

I agree.  I am suggesting above we get it ported to all IPv6 platforms.
For the reason you stated.  

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 01:24:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02470>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 00:28:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02464>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 00:28:02 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20161>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 00:27:54 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id QAA13098; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:27:37 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id HAA12988; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:24:53 GMT
To: 6bone@isi.edu, IPv6Imp@munnari.oz.au, v6@wide.ad.jp
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 01:20:40 -0400"
References: <9607310520.AA28617@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:24:53 +0900
Message-Id: <12985.838797893@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

From: bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: SSD v6 at N+I tokyo 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 01:20:40 -0400

> I agree.  I am suggesting above we get it ported to all IPv6 platforms.
> For the reason you stated.  

Uhhm. Our NV is very ad-hoc, unicast only. We have not implemented
multicast feature because we faced a scope problem for multicast. I'm
planing to submit an I-D to address this issue soon.

Anyway, our NV can be compiled on Nara kernel and yours, Jim.

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 04:55:20 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06394>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 03:58:25 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06388>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 03:58:21 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24263>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 03:58:18 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id TAA28283; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:58:10 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id KAA13204; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:55:20 GMT
To: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Cc: qv@cs.unh.edu, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: tunnel request
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:31:39 +0200"
References: <199607200931.LAA13465@phoebe.urec.fr>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:55:20 +0900
Message-Id: <13201.838810520@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

From: Bernard.Tuy@urec.fr
Subject: Re: tunnel request
Date: Sat, 20 Jul 1996 11:31:39 +0200

> |   I can ping UNI-C and G6 tunnel endpoint v4-compatible address but I can't ping
> |   WIDE's tunnel endpoint at ::163.221.11.21 . 

Please keep in mind that IPv6 test address must be used in the
6bone. There is no v4-compatible address in the WIDE 6bone.

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 05:12:44 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06670>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 04:15:40 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06664>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 04:15:35 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24578>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 04:15:33 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id UAA29226; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:15:30 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id LAA13219; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:12:44 GMT
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 21 Jul 96 20:00:35 -0400"
References: <9607220000.AA00038@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:12:44 +0900
Message-Id: <13216.838811564@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next 
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 96 20:00:35 -0400

> So if someone wants to send sipper.pa-x.dec.com an IPv6 packet they must
> go through Europe as opposed to the UNH-BAY-DEC point?  If so that is
> not a good idea???

The WIDE 6bone had been connected to Cisco and NRL before we set up a
tunnel to UNI-C. Ask rja to set up an end point for you.

As I said time to time, we have already drawn a 6bone map with our
best knowledge. Access to "http://www.wide.ad.jp/wg/ipv6/6bone.ps".

It seems to me that no one controls the entire policy. No routing
technology is introduced. I'm very afraid that the 6bone would break
down soon. 

Actually we WIDE project can't manage all routing information even for
the WIDE 6bone so we start rejecting requests from some organizations
in Japan.

I suggest that we should discuss routing protocols as soon as
possible.

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 05:58:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09355>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:00:18 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09349>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:00:16 -0700
Received: from inner.net (avarice.inner.net) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00297>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:00:07 -0700
Received: from inner.net (todd.cs.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.90.8]) by inner.net (8.7.3/42) with ESMTP id IAA13984; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:21:31 -0400
Message-Id: <199608011221.IAA13984@inner.net>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:12:44 +0900."
             <13216.838811564@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
X-Copyright: Copyright 1996, Craig Metz, All Rights Reserved.
X-Reposting-Policy: With explicit permission only
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:58:24 -0400
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In message <13216.838811564@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>, you write:
>It seems to me that no one controls the entire policy. No routing
>technology is introduced. I'm very afraid that the 6bone would break
>down soon. 
>
>Actually we WIDE project can't manage all routing information even for
>the WIDE 6bone so we start rejecting requests from some organizations
>in Japan.

	I do not believe that the current set of IPv6 test tunnels is in
any danger of getting to a point where it will "break down soon".

	I believe that it is very easy to sit down and hammer out simple
tools to manage static routing tables of the order of magnitude that you
would currently need to deal with.

>I suggest that we should discuss routing protocols as soon as
>possible.

	Discuss all you want. There's no code.

								-Craig

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 05:57:55 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09597>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:11:29 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09591>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:11:27 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00701>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 07:11:25 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id JAA13757; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:58:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA22894; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:57:55 -0400
Message-Id: <9607311357.AA22894@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=    <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 20:12:44 +0900."
             <13216.838811564@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 09:57:55 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

What I think we need to do after configuring this with UNH on the east
coast.  Is determine a way of automating prefix distribution on the
6bone with the tunnel end points.  You should be able to directly send
to UNH which is our leg of the 6bone on the U.S. East coast. And not
have to go through West Coast given the prefix of the node based on RFC
1897.  We should have the East Coast end point up soon.

If we could develop an algorithm to generate the IPv4-Tunnel end point
from the prefix which may be possible using RFC 1897 that would help a
lot.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 01:41:08 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11813>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:41:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11803>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:41:20 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04462>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:41:20 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id IAA25565; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:41:09 -0700
Message-Id: <199607311541.IAA25565@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 08:41:08 PDT
In-Reply-To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
       "Re: more tunnels and what to do next" (Jul 31,  8:12pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kazu,

  I don't understand why you all are having trouble with routing.  Both
NRL and cisco are keeping full routing tables and not having any problems.
If you can't act as a 6bone backbone router for Japan, then maybe the
hub should be in Europe or North America ?  I'm happy to nail up a tunnel
to pretty much anyone topologically nearby that wants one, including to
other Japanese sites that you are rejecting.

Ran
rja@cisco.com


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 08:37:58 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15067>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:38:06 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15061>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:38:05 -0700
Received: from cs.unh.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA07751>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 09:38:03 -0700
Received: from agate.cs.unh.edu by cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA12586; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 12:38:00 -0400
Received: by agate.cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA22880; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 12:37:59 -0400
From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Message-Id: <199607311637.MAA22880@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 12:37:58 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6bone m-list)
In-Reply-To: <9607311357.AA22894@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> from "bound@zk3.dec.com" at Jul 31, 96 09:57:55 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi Jim,
>
>What I think we need to do after configuring this with UNH on the east
>coast.  Is determine a way of automating prefix distribution on the
>6bone with the tunnel end points.  You should be able to directly send
>to UNH which is our leg of the 6bone on the U.S. East coast. And not
>have to go through West Coast given the prefix of the node based on RFC
>1897.  We should have the East Coast end point up soon.
>
>If we could develop an algorithm to generate the IPv4-Tunnel end point
>from the prefix which may be possible using RFC 1897 that would help a
>lot.
>
>/jim
>

Looks like a good idea. How about everyone having 24 bit IPv4 subnets. so that
we have 64 bit prefixes formed from there. Ex 132.177.118.0 is 84b1:7600
when I form a prefix I get 5f02:3000:7600:84b1::/64. Then all can agree that 
some standard last octet can be used to find the v4 address for the 
tunnel endpoint. How abot using the last octet of your autonomous system #
e.g. for us ASN is 0x0230 so the last octet is 0x30 so the the tunnel
endpoint is 132.177.118.48.

This is pretty restrictive though, may be something on similar lines.

Quaizar

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 19:31:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19440>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:34:04 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19434>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:34:02 -0700
Received: from oberon.di.fc.ul.pt by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA11045>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:33:43 -0700
Received: (from roque@localhost) by oberon.di.fc.ul.pt (8.6.6.Beta9/8.6.6.Beta9) id SAA10264; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:31:53 +0100
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:31:53 +0100
Message-Id: <199607311731.SAA10264@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU (6bone m-list)
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next
In-Reply-To: <199607311637.MAA22880@agate.cs.unh.edu>
References: <9607311357.AA22894@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
	<199607311637.MAA22880@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.69)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>>>> "Quaizar" == Quaizar Vohra <qv@cs.unh.edu> writes:

    Quaizar> Hi Jim,
    >>  What I think we need to do after configuring this with UNH on
    >> the east coast.  Is determine a way of automating prefix
    >> distribution on the 6bone with the tunnel end points.  You
    >> should be able to directly send to UNH which is our leg of the
    >> 6bone on the U.S. East coast. And not have to go through West
    >> Coast given the prefix of the node based on RFC 1897.  We
    >> should have the East Coast end point up soon.
    >> 
    >> If we could develop an algorithm to generate the IPv4-Tunnel
    >> end point from the prefix which may be possible using RFC 1897
    >> that would help a lot.
    >> 
    >> /jim
    >> 

    Quaizar> Looks like a good idea. How about everyone having 24 bit
    Quaizar> IPv4 subnets. so that we have 64 bit prefixes formed from
    Quaizar> there. Ex 132.177.118.0 is 84b1:7600 when I form a prefix
    Quaizar> I get 5f02:3000:7600:84b1::/64. Then all can agree that
    Quaizar> some standard last octet can be used to find the v4
    Quaizar> address for the tunnel endpoint. How abot using the last
    Quaizar> octet of your autonomous system # e.g. for us ASN is
    Quaizar> 0x0230 so the last octet is 0x30 so the the tunnel
    Quaizar> endpoint is 132.177.118.48.

    Quaizar> This is pretty restrictive though, may be something on
    Quaizar> similar lines.

Sorry, but the idea seams terrible.

This way to configure a tunnel you are requiring that end points have
a particular IPv4 address which might be already in use by another
system on your network, no matter what the scheme is. Also you impose
that the is only one tunnel end-point per prefix. Some people already
have more than one (for different tunnels of course), if i'm not
mistaken, and i was planning on doing  the same.

The second point is that i really don't understand what you're trying
to achieve. If we're talking about static configuration here, then all
you need to know is the other end prefix and v4 end-point. As you've
seen the end-point info doesn't add too much space to the prefix list
that you need anyway.

And, as things are today, you can configure unidirectional
links, i.e. configure a tunnel for which the other end point knows
nothing, if you have the prefix and v4 address. Your proposal makes
this even easier to happen, which i don't think is a good idea.

If you ask the DNS, it will happily tell you quad-A records for my
network but i would apreciate that people wouldn't start dumping
packets to my tunnel end-point without prior agreement.

The original question is if packets from A should go to B before
reaching C, C being closer to A. I believe the answer to be: set a
tunnel between A and C and tell B about it.

regards,
  Pedro.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 07:06:29 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19907>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:41:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19889>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:40:59 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA11383>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 10:40:57 -0700
Received: from rama.imag.fr (rama.imag.fr [129.88.30.9]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id TAA07876; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:40:49 +0200
Received: (from durand@localhost) by rama.imag.fr (8.6.10/8.6.9) id FAA10360; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 05:06:29 +0200
From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Message-Id: <960731050629.ZM10338@rama.imag.fr>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 05:06:29 +0200
In-Reply-To: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
        "Re: more tunnels and what to do next" (Jul 31,  8:41am)
References: <199607311541.IAA25565@puli.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.514 14may96)
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: RFC1897 & more tunels
Cc: hinden@ipsilon.com, postel@ISI.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

The question now is how to grow from a 3 nodes 6-bone
to a 10 or 15 nodes 6-bone

Basicaly I see 3 solutions for the very short term

1) an n to n topology. Each node maintains routing tables to the other nodes.
This is what we agreed on at last 6-bone meeting in Montreal. This just won't
scale very well.

2) a star topology. Only the central node has to maintain all routes,
the other just need a default route to it. The drawback is that scheme
create a single point of failure.

3) a mix of the 2 solutions.

In france, the G6-bone is made of 3 islands and will grow to 5 or 6 by the end
of the year. We agreed on a star topology inside the G6-bone with a central
node at imag
(129.88.30.1, 6bone-gw.ipv6.imag.fr, 5f06:b500:8158:1a00:1:0:8158:1a01)

What could be a solution will be to have a small number of core 6-bone nodes
will a complete knowledge of the other core nodes. Typically one for each
country. Then, other folks willing to join will just have to tunnel to the
closest core 6-bone node.

This is not as simple as it sounds. The problem is with the routing
tables. We do not want to manage hundreds of static routes.
The issue is RFC897. It specifies that the address is 5f + ASnumber of the
IPv4 provider + ipv4 address of the network.
This is simple and does not require any registry. But maybe it's too simple.
We can not easily agregate routes that are not for the same AS,
and inside an AS, we can not agregate routes for differents
ipv4 networks that belong to the same institute.

Let me take two examples:

a) inside the G6-bone, we have an island at INRIA. They use 2 ipv4 networks
with very differents numbers. I need two different routes for them.

b) inside the 6-bone. I have asked people to route 5f06:b500::/32 to my
entry point. Fine till now. But if someone inside G6 has a different ISP
tham mine, this will not work anymore.

So maybe it's time to revisit RFC1897.

RFC1897 states:

   | 3 |  5 bits  |  16 bits | 8 |   24 bits  | 8 | 16 bits|48 bits|
   +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+
   |   |          |Autonomous|   |    IPv4    |   | Subnet | Intf. |
   |010|  11111   |  System  |RES|   Network  |RES|        |       |
   |   |          |  Number  |   |   Address  |   | Address|  ID   |
   +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+


maybe something more suitable will be:

   | 3 |  5 bits  | 8bits| 16 bits  | 8bits |  24 bits  | 16 bits|48 bits|
   +---+----------+------+----------+-------+-----------+--------+-------+
   |   |          |      |Autonomous|IPv6   |    IPv4   | Subnet | Intf. |
   |010|  11111   |6-bone|  System  |Island |Network    |        |       |
   |   |          |node  |  Number  |Number |  Address  | Address|  ID   |
   +---+----------+-----------------+-------------------+--------+-------+

The "6 bone node" will then be a number attributed to a core 6-bone node.
As there will be very few core 6-bone node, this will be managable.

Then, inside each island, we can attribute island numbers.

Using this scheme, routing table will be very simple.
The n core 6-bone nodes will only need n-1 "external" routes
and m (the number of internal island) "internal" routes.


Then as Jim said, we also need an algorithm to find the ipv4 address
of a tunnel endpoint from it's ipv6 address.
I have a suggestion:
assign a special ipv6 global address for the tunnel endpoint and
put the ipv4 address of the encapsulating interface into the last 32 bits.

Example, my tunnel IPv4 address is: 129.88.26.1 (= 8158:1a01 hexa)
It's IPv6 address is 6bone-gw.ipv6.imag.fr: 5f06:b500:8158:1a00:1:0:8158:1a01
according to RFC1897 and could be 5f01:06b5:0181:581a:0001:0000:8158:1a01
	-> 6-bone node 1
	-> AS 06b5
	-> island number 1
	-> ipv4 network address: 81:581a
	-> subnet address: 0001
	-> interface: 0000:8158:1a01 -> ipv4 tunnel interface 129.88.26.1
according to the scheme I propose.


	- Alain.



-- 
                                                                        ^_^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   U  (* *)
Alain DURAND                       |  Preserve keyboards:           |  ( v )
I.M.A.G.                           |     use completion.            |  /~~~\
Direction des Moyens Informatiques |-----------------------------  <|=< IP  >=
BP 53 38041 Grenoble Cedex 9       | E-Mail: Alain.Durand@imag.fr   |  \ v6/
France                             | Phone: +33 76 63 57 03         |   <~~<
Postmaster@imag.fr                 | Fax:   +33 76 51 49 64            ~   ~

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 10:42:21 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23030>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:44:09 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23018>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:44:06 -0700
Received: from inner.net (avarice.inner.net) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14766>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:44:03 -0700
Received: from inner.net (todd.cs.nrl.navy.mil [132.250.90.8]) by inner.net (8.7.3/42) with ESMTP id NAA14208; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:05:24 -0400
Message-Id: <199608011705.NAA14208@inner.net>
To: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, hinden@ipsilon.com, postel@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RFC1897 & more tunels 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 1996 05:06:29 +0200."
             <960731050629.ZM10338@rama.imag.fr> 
X-Copyright: Copyright 1996, Craig Metz, All Rights Reserved.
X-Reposting-Policy: With explicit permission only
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:42:21 -0400
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In message <960731050629.ZM10338@rama.imag.fr>, you write:
>The question now is how to grow from a 3 nodes 6-bone
>to a 10 or 15 nodes 6-bone

	I believe you are a month too late.

	I am concerned about recent discussions of going and changing address
formats. People are creating problems that don't really exist and then trying
to solve them. The current address syntax is not perfect, but it works fine.

								-Craig

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 12:32:35 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27574>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:32:45 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27568>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:32:43 -0700
Received: from cs.unh.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20816>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:32:40 -0700
Received: from agate.cs.unh.edu by cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA13252; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:32:36 -0400
Received: by agate.cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id QAA24799; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:32:36 -0400
From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Message-Id: <199607312032.QAA24799@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6bone m-list)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:32:35 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dear qv,
From qv Wed Jul 31 14:32:04 1996
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next
To: roque@di.fc.ul.pt (Pedro Roque Marques)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:32:04 -0400 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <199607311731.SAA10264@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt> from "Pedro Roque Marques" at Jul 31, 96 06:31:53 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 3656      

>
>>>>>> "Quaizar" == Quaizar Vohra <qv@cs.unh.edu> writes:
>
>    Quaizar> Hi Jim,
>    >>  What I think we need to do after configuring this with UNH on
>    >> the east coast.  Is determine a way of automating prefix
>    >> distribution on the 6bone with the tunnel end points.  You
>    >> should be able to directly send to UNH which is our leg of the
>    >> 6bone on the U.S. East coast. And not have to go through West
>    >> Coast given the prefix of the node based on RFC 1897.  We
>    >> should have the East Coast end point up soon.
>    >> 
>    >> If we could develop an algorithm to generate the IPv4-Tunnel
>    >> end point from the prefix which may be possible using RFC 1897
>    >> that would help a lot.
>    >> 
>    >> /jim
>    >> 
>
>    Quaizar> Looks like a good idea. How about everyone having 24 bit
>    Quaizar> IPv4 subnets. so that we have 64 bit prefixes formed from
>    Quaizar> there. Ex 132.177.118.0 is 84b1:7600 when I form a prefix
>    Quaizar> I get 5f02:3000:7600:84b1::/64. Then all can agree that
>    Quaizar> some standard last octet can be used to find the v4
>    Quaizar> address for the tunnel endpoint. How abot using the last
>    Quaizar> octet of your autonomous system # e.g. for us ASN is
>    Quaizar> 0x0230 so the last octet is 0x30 so the the tunnel
>    Quaizar> endpoint is 132.177.118.48.
>
>    Quaizar> This is pretty restrictive though, may be something on
>    Quaizar> similar lines.
>
>Sorry, but the idea seams terrible.
>
>This way to configure a tunnel you are requiring that end points have
>a particular IPv4 address which might be already in use by another
>system on your network, no matter what the scheme is. Also you impose
>that the is only one tunnel end-point per prefix. Some people already
>have more than one (for different tunnels of course), if i'm not
>mistaken, and i was planning on doing  the same.
>
>The second point is that i really don't understand what you're trying
>to achieve. If we're talking about static configuration here, then all
>you need to know is the other end prefix and v4 end-point. As you've
>seen the end-point info doesn't add too much space to the prefix list
>that you need anyway.
>
>And, as things are today, you can configure unidirectional
>links, i.e. configure a tunnel for which the other end point knows
>nothing, if you have the prefix and v4 address. Your proposal makes
>this even easier to happen, which i don't think is a good idea.
>
>If you ask the DNS, it will happily tell you quad-A records for my
>network but i would apreciate that people wouldn't start dumping
>packets to my tunnel end-point without prior agreement.
>
>The original question is if packets from A should go to B before
>reaching C, C being closer to A. I believe the answer to be: set a
>tunnel between A and C and tell B about it.
>
>regards,
>  Pedro.
>


I agree my idea is terrible.  

The question I think is to reduce the amount of static
configuration. Currently we can live with these, but not for long. But
wait for routing protocols till then.

But I would prefer using prefixes which would aggregate routes in one
region, i.e.  into shorter prefixes. So that people do heirarchial
routing and have less tunnels to configure. I agree that currenlty 6bone
is like mbone, but I hope we don't want it to continue like that for long.

For example here on East coast we can have one single tunnel end-point for
Digital, UNH and Bay and possibly others.

Quaizar

------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090



-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 22:40:27 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28347>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:42:12 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28338>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:42:10 -0700
Received: from oberon.di.fc.ul.pt by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21337>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:41:59 -0700
Received: (from roque@localhost) by oberon.di.fc.ul.pt (8.6.6.Beta9/8.6.6.Beta9) id VAA10574; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:40:27 +0100
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:40:27 +0100
Message-Id: <199607312040.VAA10574@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: RFC1897 & more tunels
In-Reply-To: <960731050629.ZM10338@rama.imag.fr>
References: <199607311541.IAA25565@puli.cisco.com>
	<960731050629.ZM10338@rama.imag.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.69)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>>>> "Alain" == Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@imag.fr> writes:

Hi Alain,

    Alain> So maybe it's time to revisit RFC1897.

One of us has a interpretation problem with 1897.
The way i read it is that it describes a way for automatic assigment
of IPv6 prefixes, it does not limit what you can do with them.

If you have your own prefix you can delegate how much of it to anyone
you wish to. If you own an AS registration you have automatically a
/24 prefix, so you can acomodate up to 2^40 sites and still give them
a /64 prefix.

hope it is enought ;-).

regards,
  Pedro.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 07:02:30 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29310>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:03:13 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29303>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:03:06 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA22568>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:03:04 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <14513(4)>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:02:52 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:02:31 PDT
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:02:30 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul31.140231pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Obviously, manual configuration of routes gets unmanageable pretty quickly --
it's only tolerable for a few tens of routes.  Routers in stub subtrees
need not keep all the routes, just the local ones plus default, so we can
can probably tolerate manual config at the edges for some time.  However,
for those more centrally located routers, I think we should exert effort
to get RIPng deployed and working -- that ought to be relatively
straightforward, and in my opinion, a better use of time than tryng to
get agreement on yet another interim addressing plan.

Flat routing with RIPng should suffice for hundreds of routes; beyond that,
we clearly need hierarchical routing, but that should probably also
coincide with moving to "real" addresses, rather than the test addresses.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 07:11:12 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00405>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:11:25 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00398>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:11:23 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA22940>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:11:23 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id OAA24495; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:11:12 -0700
Message-Id: <199607312111.OAA24495@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:11:12 PDT
In-Reply-To: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
       "Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)" (Jul 31,  4:32pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Quaizar,

  Your tunnel endpoint can contain a "default" (actually 5f00::/8)
route pointing at NRL, a static route for DEC, a static route
for Bay, and any routes needed with UNH.   That is entirely
sufficient to work properly with the 6bone and seems entirely
managable by hand.

  So I don't see the need for any changes to the 1897 specification.

Ran
rja@cisco.com


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 13:20:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00860>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:20:08 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00852>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:20:05 -0700
Received: from cs.unh.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23449>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:20:04 -0700
Received: from agate.cs.unh.edu by cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA13395; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:20:02 -0400
Received: by agate.cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id RAA25165; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:20:01 -0400
From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Message-Id: <199607312120.RAA25165@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 17:20:00 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6bone m-list)
In-Reply-To: <199607312111.OAA24495@puli.cisco.com> from "Ran Atkinson" at Jul 31, 96 02:11:12 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi Ran,
>
>Quaizar,
>
>  Your tunnel endpoint can contain a "default" (actually 5f00::/8)
>route pointing at NRL, a static route for DEC, a static route
>for Bay, and any routes needed with UNH.   That is entirely
>sufficient to work properly with the 6bone and seems entirely
>managable by hand.
>
>  So I don't see the need for any changes to the 1897 specification.
>
>Ran
>rja@cisco.com
>
>
>-- 
>

That's what I am currently doing and it works, but as Alain pointed 
out that we don't want a star topology. I agree fully with Alain's
idea which has always been my chant, i.e. do heirachial routing.

Quaizar


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 08:00:19 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03795>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:03:02 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03782>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:02:58 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25559>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:02:04 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15425(2)>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:00:39 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:00:20 PDT
To: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: qv's message of Wed, 31 Jul 96 14:20:00 -0800.
             <199607312120.RAA25165@agate.cs.unh.edu> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:00:19 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul31.150020pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> That's what I am currently doing and it works, but as Alain pointed 
> out that we don't want a star topology. I agree fully with Alain's
> idea which has always been my chant, i.e. do heirachial routing.

I think that an approximate star topology, i.e., a small mesh of "backbone"
routers, with individual sites connected as leaves to the nearest one
or two backbone routers, would be just fine for a while.  If you want to
exploit a richer topology and get out of the static configuration game,
then use a dynamic routing protocol, like RIPng.  Hierarchical routing
is what you do when flat routing gets too big -- I don't think that'll
be the case at least for the next 6 months.

Steve




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 14:12:50 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04030>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:09:57 -0700
Received: from metro.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04024>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:09:55 -0700
Received: from maia.east.isi.edu by metro.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26407>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:09:54 -0400
Message-Id: <199607312209.AA26407@metro.isi.edu>
To: deering@parc.xerox.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 1996 14:02:30 PDT."
             <96Jul31.140231pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:12:50 EDT
From: Allison Mankin <mankin@ISI.EDU>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Steve,

> for those more centrally located routers, I think we should exert effort
> to get RIPng deployed and working -- that ought to be relatively
> straightforward, and in my opinion, a better use of time than tryng to
> get agreement on yet another interim addressing plan.
> 

Yes.  Craig Labovitz (MERIT) has developed a RIPv2 for IPv6,
which some sites on this list have been testing.  

> Flat routing with RIPng should suffice for hundreds of routes; beyond that,
> we clearly need hierarchical routing, but that should probably also
> coincide with moving to "real" addresses, rather than the test addresses.
> 
> 
Those quotes around real are very poignant. 
Can we later this year have an interim draft 
for aggregatable addresses?  I would like to see it be
geographic addressing without all the details resolved:  
Instead of Alain's "cores", your design team could
give us interim neutral interconnects, leaving
out for this cut how the "real" ones will manage internal
routing.

Just a wish,

Allison

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 14:03:29 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04095>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:10:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04083>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:10:12 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA26053>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:10:11 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id SAA00223; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:03:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA23604; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:03:29 -0400
Message-Id: <9607312203.AA23604@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Cc: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra), 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 14:11:12 PDT."
             <199607312111.OAA24495@puli.cisco.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 18:03:29 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Ran,

>  Your tunnel endpoint can contain a "default" (actually 5f00::/8)
>route pointing at NRL, a static route for DEC, a static route
>for Bay, and any routes needed with UNH.   That is entirely
>sufficient to work properly with the 6bone and seems entirely
>managable by hand.

I use this to get to UNH as I direct all traffic through to UNH as
5f00/8.  But I don't want Quaizar doing this for the east coast.  I want
him to have a route to you, one to WIDE, one to Europe, one to NRL, et
al.  We should not have to go through you to get to WIDE that is not a
good enough test.  Or likewise I don't think you should have to go
through us to get to G6 in Europe via UNH.

/jim



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 14:07:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04171>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:12:18 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04160>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:12:16 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA26126>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 15:12:09 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id SAA05268; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:07:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA23783; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:07:02 -0400
Message-Id: <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: RIPng
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 18:07:02 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

We have the following implementations running RIPng to start using
routing:

  1.  Telebit Router
  2.  Digital Router
  3.  Bay Networks Router
  4.  Sun Host       
  5.  Digital Host (Static Routes now)

So lets use them.  UNH will have both Digital and Bay Routers.  There
will also be a Digital IPv6 router at G6 soon.  Telebit is already doing
this I think.

So lets just do it and quit talking about it the code does exist.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 15:28:57 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08327>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:31:37 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08321>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:31:35 -0700
Received: from home.merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00233>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:31:34 -0700
Received: from localhost (masaki@localhost) by home.merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id TAA11809; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:29:02 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199607312329.TAA11809@home.merit.edu>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:07:02 EDT."
             <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:28:57 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Allison writes,

>> Yes.  Craig Labovitz (MERIT) has developed a RIPv2 for IPv6,
>> which some sites on this list have been testing.  

Craig and I are working on. It works on INRIA freebsd. It need
some modification to make it work on a tunnel, but soon.

Jim writes,

> We have the following implementations running RIPng to start using
> routing:
> 
>   1.  Telebit Router
>   2.  Digital Router
>   3.  Bay Networks Router
>   4.  Sun Host       
>   5.  Digital Host (Static Routes now)
> 
> So lets use them.  UNH will have both Digital and Bay Routers.  There
> will also be a Digital IPv6 router at G6 soon.  Telebit is already doing
> this I think.
> 
> So lets just do it and quit talking about it the code does exist.
> 
> /jim

I want to know how they implement ripng on a tunnel. I think that
the ripng draft doesn't clearly say in case of tunneling. There
is no link-local address and maybe no multicasting depending on
its sit implementation. I'm afraid that we need interoperablity
check on ripng as well. (Have it done at UNH? I'm sorry I'm a
newcomer) If some of 6bone sites can run ripng, I'd like to make
a temporal tunnel to it in order to check interoperablity with
our implementation.

Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 15:18:16 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09508>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:50:32 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09501>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:50:30 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03597>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 16:50:28 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id TAA26721; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:18:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA28132; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 19:18:16 -0400
Message-Id: <9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 18:07:02 EDT."
             <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 19:18:16 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

If we are not going to do RIPng in 1 month then lets use Alain's scheme for 
now at least for the star topology.  

And I am listening more to people who are sending packets on the network
and doing this real time than the theories to get this up and running.
ESPECIALLY IF THEY TELL SOMEONE WORKING THEIR BUTT OFF THAT THEIR IDEA
IS TERRIBLE (they almost got a real flameagram from me on that one).

And I have respect for those who were at the bake-off and ran real code
under test with other implementations than those who did not.  Nov 96 will be
the next bake off hope we have more implementations. 

This is the 6bone list not the IETF list and different rules.  We need to
see what happens via deployment of IPv6 thats the purpose of this work
not to appease any interests other than that. 

Right now we are 60 days ahead of where I thought we would be I think
this thing is going to explode and lots of users will be coming on
quick.  Based on my intelligence in the market.

Even if we do get RIPng working that does not fix the administrative
problems of configured tunnels.  I still think it needs to be automated
simply because its part of transition to IPv6.  We should be thinking
about that and if we come up with an idea do it.  Changing RFC 1897
might cause more pain than its worth, but I don't think we should rule
it out just yet.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 11:05:06 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12053>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:50 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12038>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:46 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04474>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:42 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <14662(7)>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:22 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:07 PDT
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: bound's message of Wed, 31 Jul 96 16:18:16 -0800.
             <9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 18:05:06 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul31.180507pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> If we are not going to do RIPng in 1 month then lets use Alain's scheme for 
> now at least for the star topology.  

Note that I was agreeing with Alain regarding the basic topology of this
stage of the 6bone, that is, a mesh of "backbone" or "core" routers, with
individual sites or sub-communities hung off that.  Any problem with
insufficient aggregation should only be in the backbone routers, since the
leaf sites or communities can just use default for all off-site or out-of-
community destinations.  There seems to be some disagreement on the severity
of the backbone problem, but if the folks managing those routers find it
too much of a burden, and can't solve it soon enough by getting RIPng
running, by all means let's aggregate routes as Alain suggested.  Though,
as Pedro pointed out, we don't need to change the addressing format for that.
To aggregate all the European sites, for example, just pick one of the
European AS numbers currently being used in the 6bone and get all European
sites to renumber their nodes under that one AS number -- they'll still
have the IPv4 prefix in there to ensure uniqueness.

> And I am listening more to people who are sending packets on the network
> and doing this real time than the theories to get this up and running.

Are you suggesting that I should shut up?

> And I have respect for those who were at the bake-off and ran real code
> under test with other implementations than those who did not.

Let's all try to maintain respect for each other, OK?  This whole enterprise
is fragile enough as it is without the stress of squabbling among ourselves.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 19:01:27 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15155>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:01:33 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15149>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:01:32 -0700
Received: from cs.unh.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08456>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:01:31 -0700
Received: from agate.cs.unh.edu by cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id XAA14079; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:01:29 -0400
Received: by agate.cs.unh.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id XAA25567; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:01:28 -0400
From: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Message-Id: <199608010301.XAA25567@agate.cs.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6bone m-list)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:01:27 +2000 (EDT)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dear qv,
From qv Wed Jul 31 22:54:07 1996
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: deering@parc.xerox.com (Steve Deering)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:54:07 +2000 (EDT)
In-Reply-To: <96Jul31.150020pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com> from "Steve Deering" at Jul 31, 96 03:00:19 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1785      

Dear Steve Deering,
>
>> That's what I am currently doing and it works, but as Alain pointed 
>> out that we don't want a star topology. I agree fully with Alain's
>> idea which has always been my chant, i.e. do heirachial routing.
>
>I think that an approximate star topology, i.e., a small mesh of "backbone"
>routers, with individual sites connected as leaves to the nearest one
>or two backbone routers, would be just fine for a while.  If you want to
>exploit a richer topology and get out of the static configuration game,
>then use a dynamic routing protocol, like RIPng.  Hierarchical routing
>is what you do when flat routing gets too big -- I don't think that'll
>be the case at least for the next 6 months.
>
>Steve
>
>

I actually meant almost the same, though stupid enough not to be able to 
express it well in my mails. Currently we have a single central node and
I was against that. I has always been giving an example of UNH-BAY-CLOUD
where there is one connection to the bone and that tunnel endpoint takes
care of routing internally and I wanted a single autonomous number being
used for all three of us and so that we have a common prefix. That's what
I wrote to Craig Metz a few days back. 

Hence we have a few core routers each routing for a big cloud and the cloud 
should have one common prefix (desirable) or a few, not a lots, i.e.
one for each subnet. How the cloud handles internal routing can be its own
policy.

By the way I thought the large addresses were created for heirachial routing
and 6bone was something experimental where we can try this out.

Regards
Quaizar


-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090



-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Quaizar Vohra
Inter-Operatibility Lab. (IOL), Univ. of New Hampshire
E-mail : qv@sun4.iol.unh.edu
Phone : (603)-862-0090


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 19:20:08 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16104>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:29:20 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16098>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:29:18 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA10524>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 20:29:17 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id XAA17774; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:20:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA04534; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 23:20:08 -0400
Message-Id: <9608010320.AA04534@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 18:05:06 PDT."
             <96Jul31.180507pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 96 23:20:08 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


>> If we are not going to do RIPng in 1 month then lets use Alain's scheme for 
>> now at least for the star topology.  

>Note that I was agreeing with Alain regarding the basic topology of this
>stage of the 6bone, that is, a mesh of "backbone" or "core" routers, with
>individual sites or sub-communities hung off that.  Any problem with
>insufficient aggregation should only be in the backbone routers, since the
>leaf sites or communities can just use default for all off-site or out-of-
>community destinations.  There seems to be some disagreement on the severity
>of the backbone problem, but if the folks managing those routers find it
>too much of a burden, and can't solve it soon enough by getting RIPng
>running, by all means let's aggregate routes as Alain suggested.  Though,
>as Pedro pointed out, we don't need to change the addressing format for that.
>To aggregate all the European sites, for example, just pick one of the
>European AS numbers currently being used in the 6bone and get all European
>sites to renumber their nodes under that one AS number -- they'll still
>have the IPv4 prefix in there to ensure uniqueness.

I think we are in violent agreement.  What I think would be good is to
not force anyone to use a "path" UNH-NRL-WIDE if they can go to
MIT-UNIVARIZONA-WIDE. It should be open to what path is available like
on the Internet today based on some metric of choice.  I also think this
gives us a better system test scenario and hopefully with ripng.  I
think it should be loose, complex, and break so we understand where it
breaks. Too much order in the beginning will cause us to get secure in a
bogus way.  

>> And I am listening more to people who are sending packets on the network
>> and doing this real time than the theories to get this up and running.

>Are you suggesting that I should shut up?

No.  I am running your architecture why would I want that.  No one knows
it better than you.  I am just saying that the discussion of how maybe
to automate the tunnels should be OK.  The reason I brought it up is cause
I saw the problem if I had to do this for 1000 nodes.  In addition it
affects the transition.  When you speak as above its clear, precise, and
99% right.  But thats not what I heard in all the mail.  I heard people
who are not Steve Deering, or Brian Carpenter, or Christian Huitema, et
al. (who I consider people I automatically listen too) tell a person doing
this work and who themselves I don't think are even putting packets on the 
wire that, the other person does not have a clue.  Anyone in that
category should not shut up but I am not going to listen to them. OK.
I can see how you got what you did out of what I said and I am sorry
about that but that was not my intention.

>> And I have respect for those who were at the bake-off and ran real code
>> under test with other implementations than those who did not.

>Let's all try to maintain respect for each other, OK?  This whole enterprise
>is fragile enough as it is without the stress of squabbling among ourselves.

I agree.  But I am not going to just sit here and watch abuse either,
and you know I can't do that even if I wanted to.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 22:10:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16800>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:13:18 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16792>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:13:12 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA15159>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:13:10 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id NAA14034; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:13:07 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id EAA14010; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 04:10:22 GMT
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Things to do
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 13:10:22 +0900
Message-Id: <14007.838872622@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Now I feel much better than yesterday since many people started
talking about dynamic routing. It would be appreciated if we have the
following rough consensus:

(1) At present we tolerate a pain from static routing and manage
routing information somehow.

(2) The next routing protocol is RIPng. We will test interoperability
for RIPng at the next IOL and then move to RIPng after that if
available.

(3) Before 6bone become so large that RIPng is not enough, we will
move to hierarchical routing. But now is not the time to do so.

(4) Now we should discuss the following issues:

	(a) automating tunnels as Jim said
	(b) clarifying the RIPng spec especially on tunnels as Masaki said

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 20:05:56 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16830>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:15:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16818>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:14:54 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA15346>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 21:14:53 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id AAA05175; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 00:06:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA05968; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 00:05:57 -0400
Message-Id: <9608010405.AA05968@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: deering@parc.xerox.com
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6bone m-list)
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 23:01:27."
             <199608010301.XAA25567@agate.cs.unh.edu> 
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 96 00:05:56 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Steve,

>By the way I thought the large addresses were created for heirachial routing
>and 6bone was something experimental where we can try this out.

This is what is bugging me.  We have to be able to play and experiment
now as I think IPv6 will be deployed in the market 1 year from now and
on the Internet and on Intranets.  I hope the big ISPs join in but if
they don't lots of small ones will and I think the mgmt consulting firms
too who will be ISPs for Intranets that are fortune 100 companies. We
will have no time like the present to play like this again (unless we
keep an IPv6 research Internet up which is a really good thing to do
IMHO) and I think that is what I and others are wanting to do.  Not cast
anything in concrete or even build or change an existing IPv6 draft. I
am totally convinced IPv6 must be deployed and real products can be
built to gain revenune, market share, and $$$$ for anyone wishing to
move users to IPv6.  So we have about 1 year to get this right on the
6bone.  I realize we don't want to waste our time either.  We have
gotten a lot of good ideas for IPv6 from the implementor meetings and
implementations in general.   I think the 6bone can do that for us too
especially around transition.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Jul 31 15:55:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18333>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:56:03 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18327>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:56:02 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA22163>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:55:40 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15087(2)>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:55:31 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:55:22 PDT
To: qv@cs.unh.edu (Quaizar Vohra)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: qv's message of Tue, 30 Jul 96 19:54:07 -0800.
             <199608010254.WAA25537@agate.cs.unh.edu> 
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 22:55:22 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Jul31.225522pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Quaizar,

> I actually meant almost the same, though stupid enough not to be able to 
> express it well in my mails.

No, it's mostly my fault for spouting off without carefully reading the
mail I'm responding to.  Anyway, I glad to see we are all in approximate
agreement, even if the consensus is a bit rough.

> Hence we have a few core routers each routing for a big cloud and the cloud 
> should have one common prefix (desirable) or a few, not a lots, i.e.
> one for each subnet.

You should at least be aggregating multiple subnets from a single site
already.  Is each individual subnet showing up in all the default-free
routers??

> By the way I thought the large addresses were created for heirachial routing
> and 6bone was something experimental where we can try this out.

Absolutely.  I didn't mean to discourage experiments in hierarchical routing.
However, simply aggregating a handful of static routes into a single static
route isn't going to teach us anything new about hierarchical routing, and
it sounded like the main motivation for the proposed aggregation was not
to demonstrate or experiment with hierarchical routing, but simply to
reduce a configuration burden that some other folks think isn't such a
big deal at the moment.  Certainly, as soon as people have implementations
of actual v6 routing protocols that they wish to try out in a hierarchical
fashion on the 6bone, they should be encouraged and helped to do so.
I like Kazu's description of the set of steps to be taken to get to that
stage.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 12:12:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22700>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:13:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22694>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:12:55 -0700
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25713>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:12:51 -0700
Received: from dxcoms.cern.ch (dxcoms.cern.ch [137.138.28.176]) by dxmint.cern.ch 
	with SMTP id KAA29726; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:42 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: by dxcoms.cern.ch; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/28Jul95-0949AM)
	id AA09191; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:42 +0200
Message-Id: <9608010812.AA09191@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: mankin@ISI.EDU (Allison Mankin)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:42 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Brian Carpenter   CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <199607312209.AA26407@metro.isi.edu> from "Allison Mankin" at Jul 31, 96 06:12:50 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Allison,
> 
> > Flat routing with RIPng should suffice for hundreds of routes; beyond that,
> > we clearly need hierarchical routing, but that should probably also
> > coincide with moving to "real" addresses, rather than the test addresses.
> > 
> > 
> Those quotes around real are very poignant. 
> Can we later this year have an interim draft 
> for aggregatable addresses?

Huh?
 draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-addr-fmt-04.txt

> I would like to see it be
> geographic addressing without all the details resolved:  

If you have a solution for geographic addressing that works,
unlike all previous attempts, pls write it up.

  Brian

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 11:53:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29046>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 02:57:05 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29035>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 02:57:02 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27720>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 02:56:59 -0700
Received: from shand.reo.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id FAA22574; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 05:53:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost by shand.reo.dec.com (5.65/MS-010395)
	id AA12503; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:53:48 +0100
Message-Id: <9608010953.AA12503@shand.reo.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Cc: shand@shand.reo.dec.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jul 96 19:28:57 EDT."
             <199607312329.TAA11809@home.merit.edu> 
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 96 10:53:47 +0100
From: (Mike Shand REO2 G/C2 DTN:830-4424) <shand@shand.reo.dec.com>
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> I want to know how they implement ripng on a tunnel. I think that
> the ripng draft doesn't clearly say in case of tunneling. There
> is no link-local address and maybe no multicasting depending on
> its sit implementation. I'm afraid that we need interoperablity
> check on ripng as well. (Have it done at UNH? I'm sorry I'm a
> newcomer) If some of 6bone sites can run ripng, I'd like to make
> a temporal tunnel to it in order to check interoperablity with
> our implementation.

Well, we don't at the moment. At first sight it seems pretty trivial.
You just define a pseudo pt-pt interface for the tunnel and run
RIPng (or whatever other routing protocol you fancy) over that 
interface. Presumably you assign a link local address by whatever
means you would normally use for a pt-pt (e.g. PPP) link. The MTU would
have to be set to take account of the additional IPv4 header. There would
be no broadcast/multicasting.

However, thinking about it some more, it starts to get interesting.
Suppose the IPv4 tunnel becomes unidirectional, either because it was
wrongly configured, or because the underlying IPv4 routing becomes
unidirectional. Do we need any special mehanisms to dectect such
misconfiguiration? What other gotchas might be lurking? Do we need to
send router advertisements over such a link which should only have another 
router at the other end? Presumably so, since it could in theory be a host
running RIP in listen mode (say). etc. etc.

I think we can make it work, but it looks like we need either some mods
to RIPng or a separate draft to specify exectly how it is supposed to be done.

Has anyone else actually got this working?

	Mike

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 12:59:01 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29918>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 04:09:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29912>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 04:09:19 -0700
Received: from oberon.di.fc.ul.pt by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28706>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 04:07:56 -0700
Received: (from roque@localhost) by oberon.di.fc.ul.pt (8.6.6.Beta9/8.6.6.Beta9) id LAA11527; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 11:59:01 +0100
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 11:59:01 +0100
Message-Id: <199608011059.LAA11527@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: <9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
References: <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
	<9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.69)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>>>> "Jim" == bound  <bound@zk3.dec.com> writes:


    Jim> And I am listening more to people who are sending packets on
    Jim> the network and doing this real time than the theories to get
    Jim> this up and running.  ESPECIALLY IF THEY TELL SOMEONE WORKING
    Jim> THEIR BUTT OFF THAT THEIR IDEA IS TERRIBLE (they almost got a
    Jim> real flameagram from me on that one).

You have every right to flame, Jim. Although i didn't ment the
interpretation that the phrase got i recognise that was a very bad
choice of words and i would like give you my public apologies for
that. I ask you to consider that for a non native english speaker it
is sometimes hard to know the intensity of an expression.

I still think that it is not the way to go. Please disregard the first
sentence in that mail and consider the rest of it.

    Jim> And I have respect for those who were at the bake-off and ran
    Jim> real code under test with other implementations than those
    Jim> who did not.

My stuff is working, although i constantly find new problems with it
every day. As we have no money to participate in the IOL consortium
the only testing we can do is via the 6bone. Everybody has been very
cooperative there and we're making good progress.

Basically i think people are discussing problems that there is no need
to solve now. I believe we should concentrate on getting the basic
working and then build the rest of the building. I only have one
implementation other than my own here, so i cannot comment from first
hand knowledge, but the comments i hear is that most implementations
are still on very raw state.

To give you the example i know off, it is not very interesstening to
have a machine capable of RIPng but not capable of configured
tunneling, that can't delete routes, has random source address
selection and so on. I'm not complaining, they do a better job than i
do in some aspects ...

regards,
  Pedro.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 03:08:57 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02375>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:43:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02369>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:43:16 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03064>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:43:15 -0700
Received: from rama.imag.fr (rama.imag.fr [129.88.30.9]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA02827; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:43:13 +0200
Received: (from durand@localhost) by rama.imag.fr (8.6.10/8.6.9) id BAA11094; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:08:57 +0200
From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Message-Id: <960801010857.ZM11096@rama.imag.fr>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:08:57 +0200
In-Reply-To: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
        "Re: RIPng" (Aug  1, 11:59am)
References: <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
	<9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
	<199608011059.LAA11527@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.514 14may96)
To: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
Subject: RIPng & what to do next.
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Aug 1, 11:59am, Pedro Roque Marques wrote:
> Subject: Re: RIPng
> Basically i think people are discussing problems that there is no need
> to solve now. I believe we should concentrate on getting the basic
> working and then build the rest of the building. I only have one
> implementation other than my own here, so i cannot comment from first
> hand knowledge, but the comments i hear is that most implementations
> are still on very raw state.
>
> To give you the example i know off, it is not very interesstening to
> have a machine capable of RIPng but not capable of configured
> tunneling, that can't delete routes, has random source address
> selection and so on. I'm not complaining, they do a better job than i


Let me say I disagree on this particular point.
The IPv6 network I run at IMAG already has two separates networks and will
grow up to 5 or 6 by the end of August with different routers.
In those nets, I use native IPv6 other ethernet. I need RIPng code now.
And to connect this to the G6-bone or the 6-bone, I only need one
tunneling machine that I already have.


	- Alain.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 03:15:28 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02521>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:49:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02515>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:49:48 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03203>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 06:49:46 -0700
Received: from rama.imag.fr (rama.imag.fr [129.88.30.9]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA03034; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:49:44 +0200
Received: (from durand@localhost) by rama.imag.fr (8.6.10/8.6.9) id BAA11109; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:15:29 +0200
From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Message-Id: <960801011529.ZM11106@rama.imag.fr>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 01:15:28 +0200
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.514 14may96)
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


I have the feeling that we reach a rough consensus on the 6-bone topology,
i.e. some core/backbone nodes and some clouds connected to them.

In the next diagram :
	- a net is native IPv6 link
        - an island is a collection of ipv6 nets
	- a Core is core/backbone ipv6 node.
        - v6 means native IPv6
        - v4 means IPv6 encapsulated in IPv4



        v6         v6       v4
net132----island13----Core1----Core2
                        |  \  /  |
                        |   \/   |                   v6
                        |   /\   |                  ___ net475
                        |  /  \  |   v6            |
                      Core3----Core4----island47---|
                                           |       |___ net473
                                           |
                                         v4|            v6
                                           |__island48_____net484


Core4 is very close to the current situation of the G6-bone
and I believe to the other nodes of the 6-bone.

The question now is how to route packets from net475 to net132
and from net473 to net484

In my opinion, those are two different problems.
It's really interior routing versus exterior routing.
In the G6 bone, we plan to use RIPng inside islands. Maybe with some
manual configuration, we can extend it to route among our islands.

I have the feeling that doing RIPng to announce every single route
other the global 6-bone will simply not work. We need to agregate.
Doing dynamic external routing seems to me a bit premature. We can
still do a good job wit static routes if we take some precautions.

If there could be one common prefix to everything behind Core X,
then this will be very easy to do staticaly, and things could grow.
If they are many prefixes, it's going to be more difficult.
What I'd like to have on Core routers will be a simple external
routing tables like:
	5f-prefix1::/prefixlen1  -> Core1
	5f-prefix2::/prefixlen2  -> Core2
	5f-prefix3::/prefixlen1  -> Core3
	5f-prefix4::/prefixlen2  -> Core4
	...

To maintain those routing tables, a simple registry will be enough.

I see a little problem with RFC1897 address format, mainly because not all
islands behind Core X will have the same ISP, thus not the same prefix.

If we want to stay close to RFC1897, I see 3 solutions:
	a) use a special AS number for all Core X different from the ISP ones
	b) use the AS number of Core X ISP for all nets behind Core X
	c) have a Core node per AS number participating to the 6-bone.

If we agree an a scheme like this one, things could grow smoothly & quickly.
We could test both dynamic routing & hierarchical routing.

	- Alain.



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 16:01:01 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02797>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 07:02:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02791>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 07:02:47 -0700
Received: from oberon.di.fc.ul.pt by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03735>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 07:02:39 -0700
Received: (from roque@localhost) by oberon.di.fc.ul.pt (8.6.6.Beta9/8.6.6.Beta9) id PAA11715; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:01:01 +0100
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 15:01:01 +0100
Message-Id: <199608011401.PAA11715@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Cc: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: RIPng & what to do next.
In-Reply-To: <960801010857.ZM11096@rama.imag.fr>
References: <9607312207.AA23783@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
	<9607312318.AA28132@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
	<199608011059.LAA11527@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
	<roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
	<960801010857.ZM11096@rama.imag.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.69)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>>>> "Alain" == Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@imag.fr> writes:

    >> 
    >> To give you the example i know off, it is not very
    >> interesstening to have a machine capable of RIPng but not
    >> capable of configured tunneling, that can't delete routes, has
    >> random source address selection and so on. I'm not complaining,
    >> they do a better job than i


    Alain> Let me say I disagree on this particular point.  The IPv6
    Alain> network I run at IMAG already has two separates networks
    Alain> and will grow up to 5 or 6 by the end of August with
    Alain> different routers.  In those nets, I use native IPv6 other
    Alain> ethernet. I need RIPng code now.  And to connect this to
    Alain> the G6-bone or the 6-bone, I only need one tunneling
    Alain> machine that I already have.

I think i'm not making myself very clear.

On the particular example i was giving the machine picks, 50% of the
times, a link local source address when talking to a host on another
ethernet via a router. Even if you have the best routing solution in
the world that machine is not going to be able to communicate much.

This is just one particular example.

I don't disagree when you say we need routing protocols. I disagree
when people suggest that we should stop the show until we get routing
protocols because, with the current state of the art, machines crash all
over when you try something less common.

Do we agree on this ? I would think so.

If people want to start coding routing deamons i'll try to do anything
i can do to help. This includes coding routing sockets which is
something i still don't have.

regards,
  Pedro.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 01:51:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09099>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09087>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:47 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09642>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:12:46 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id IAA22239; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:51:24 -0700
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:51:24 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199608011551.IAA22239@stilton.cisco.com>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: rja@cisco.com, qv@cs.unh.edu, 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9607312203.AA23604@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> (bound@zk3.dec.com)
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>> I use this to get to UNH as I direct all traffic through to UNH as
>> 5f00/8.  But I don't want Quaizar doing this for the east coast.  I want
>> him to have a route to you, one to WIDE, one to Europe, one to NRL, et
>> al.  We should not have to go through you to get to WIDE that is not a
>> good enough test.  Or likewise I don't think you should have to go
>> through us to get to G6 in Europe via UNH.

    I disagree. This is how the MBONE got messed up. 

Dino

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 01:34:14 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09136>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:13:08 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09120>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:13:06 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09179>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:06:57 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15375(2)>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:34:25 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:34:15 PDT
To: "Brian Carpenter CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd) 
In-Reply-To: brian's message of Thu, 01 Aug 96 01:12:42 -0800.
             <9608010812.AA09191@dxcoms.cern.ch> 
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 08:34:14 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Aug1.083415pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Brian,

> If you have a solution for geographic addressing that works,
> unlike all previous attempts, pls write it up.

ftp://parcftp.xerox.com/pub/net-research/metro-addr-slides-jul95.ps

OK, so that's not the kind of write-up you were asking for.  (Allison
was also saying "pls write it up".)  But I was unaware of any proof that
it doesn't work.

Exactly which failed "attempts" at geographic addressing are you referring
to?

(Note: there are [at least] two distinct classes of "geographic" addressing
that have been proposed: (1) addressing by latitude and longitude, e.g.,
the recent GPS addressing draft, and (2) "exchange-based" addressing using
regional provider interconnects, of which metro-based addressing is one
specific example.  They have significantly different properties, so we
need to be careful to disambiguate which we are talking about.  For example,
lat/long addressing would certainly exacerbate, rather than relieve, the
routing scaling problem; the same is not true of exchange-based addressing.)

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 20:01:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09241>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:14:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09233>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:14:16 -0700
Received: from darkstar.isi.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09931>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:14:15 -0700
Received: from dxmint.cern.ch by darkstar.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21094>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:14:10 -0700
Received: from dxcoms.cern.ch (dxcoms.cern.ch [137.138.28.176]) by dxmint.cern.ch 
	with SMTP id SAA19331 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:01:47 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: by dxcoms.cern.ch; (5.65v3.0/1.1.8.2/28Jul95-0949AM)
	id AA14678; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:01:47 +0200
Message-Id: <9608011601.AA14678@dxcoms.cern.ch>
Subject: Re: more tunnels and what to do next (fwd)
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 18:01:47 +0200 (MET DST)
From: "Brian Carpenter   CERN-CN" <brian@dxcoms.cern.ch>
In-Reply-To: <96Aug1.083415pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com> from "Steve Deering" at Aug 1, 96 08:34:14 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Steve,

We should take this over to some other list, although
I'm not sure which one. IPng? I'm certainly not talking about GPS,
but about your Jul 95 presentation or the old Simpson draft on MIXen.
But let's not waste 6bone airtime on it.

  Brian

>--------- Text sent by Steve Deering follows:
> 
> Brian,
> 
> > If you have a solution for geographic addressing that works,
> > unlike all previous attempts, pls write it up.
> 
> ftp://parcftp.xerox.com/pub/net-research/metro-addr-slides-jul95.ps
> 
> OK, so that's not the kind of write-up you were asking for.  (Allison
> was also saying "pls write it up".)  But I was unaware of any proof that
> it doesn't work.
> 
> Exactly which failed "attempts" at geographic addressing are you referring
> to?
> 
> (Note: there are [at least] two distinct classes of "geographic" addressing
> that have been proposed: (1) addressing by latitude and longitude, e.g.,
> the recent GPS addressing draft, and (2) "exchange-based" addressing using
> regional provider interconnects, of which metro-based addressing is one
> specific example.  They have significantly different properties, so we
> need to be careful to disambiguate which we are talking about.  For example,
> lat/long addressing would certainly exacerbate, rather than relieve, the
> routing scaling problem; the same is not true of exchange-based addressing.)
> 
> Steve
> 


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 06:54:07 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09380>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:16:58 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09367>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:16:55 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA10185>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:16:40 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id KAA05766; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:54:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA17354; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:54:08 -0400
Message-Id: <9608011454.AA17354@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
Cc: <bound@zk3.dec.com>, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 Aug 96 11:59:01 BST."
             <199608011059.LAA11527@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt> 
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 96 10:54:07 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Cool.  Good point about the language thats my error and I apologize for
that.

>Basically i think people are discussing problems that there is no need
>to solve now. I believe we should concentrate on getting the basic
>working and then build the rest of the building. I only have one
>implementation other than my own here, so i cannot comment from first
>hand knowledge, but the comments i hear is that most implementations
>are still on very raw state.

Lets be careful on the 6bone.  "raw state" to get on the 6bone and do
Internet.  Several of the implementations are very mature using IPv6 and
all the specs associated with this new protocol.  I know we have over 40
users banging on our implementation now.  Yes its raw for the 6bone work
but not raw.  Don't forget some of us have stacks that have been
maturing for 3 years since sip 8byte proposal and have learned a lot of
engineering knowledge for the kernel, transition, and the application
interface.  But the 6bone is raw but I think we can evolve quickly and
make it medium (as opposed to well done).

As far as you not getting to the bake-offs.  UNH does have a policy if
you are a pure academic environment they can arrange for you to
participate without joining the consortia.  The other good news I have for
you is I talked to our Director of Alpha Linux at Digital and he is
going to help me get you an Alpha in Lisbon if you want it?  
Also I am willing to put your machine up and test it for you at the next
bake-off to as I think Linux is real important to IPv6 with the user
base I see evolving.  As I know travel for some is also too expensive.

>To give you the example i know off, it is not very interesstening to
>have a machine capable of RIPng but not capable of configured
>tunneling, that can't delete routes, has random source address
>selection and so on. I'm not complaining, they do a better job than i
>do in some aspects ...

Again please be careful with the words interesting.  If we have routers
that can run pure IPv6 and need to get tunneling working I still think
its interesting that engineers built IPv6 on routers already.  I agree
they need to now do tunnels rip-to-rip a.s.a.p. but they are still
interesting.  For example I want to build a pure IPv6 subnet behind our
Internet tunnel and on our host take IPv6 packets and inject them onto
an IPv6 link via an IPv6 router where the nodes on that link only speak
IPv6 (IPv4 is there but for testing just use IPv6).  That to me is
interesting.  I also hope (big hope) to test our anycast spec on this
subnet to as the in_pcb changes I checked out are minimal and the
transport ones too at least for prototyping anyway.  

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  1 08:28:38 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09659>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:19:57 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09649>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:19:56 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA10514>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:19:51 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id MAA16449; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:28:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA29421; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 12:28:38 -0400
Message-Id: <9608011628.AA29421@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: 6bone DNS Servers
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 96 12:28:38 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi,

I will be setting up our DNS Server for our AAAA records tomorrow for
our node(s).  Who can I feed our DNS records for the 6bone?

Geert? Bill Manning?

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  2 00:48:52 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21229>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:49:03 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21223>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:49:02 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23271>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 13:48:59 -0700
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA17167 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Thu, 1 Aug 1996 22:48:51 +0200
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by kantoor.ripe.net with ESMTP
	id UAA05490 (8.7.3/$Revision: 1.2 $); Thu, 1 Aug 1996 20:48:53 GMT
Message-Id: <199608012048.UAA05490@kantoor.ripe.net>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6bone registry
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 1996 22:48:52 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


I'm sorry to disrupt the current discussion on the 6bone list,
but I have been trying to send this to the list several times.
It looks like majordomo doesn't like the email-from-mailinglist
setup I'm using, and I hope it works now.


Geert Jan

---

Hi,

Sorry for this much belated message. I have been extremely busy
with a number of other things, and small problems like a 
summer cold and equipment problems (I learned more about
incompatibility with PC keyboard controllers than I ever wanted
to know while setting up an IPv6 testbox for the NCC..)

Moreover, as we're in the process of replacing our computing equipment,
I wanted to migrate some NCC services to new machines before adding
things like the ip6rr to it. As far as our FTP server, that's
completed now; I needed that machine (see below)

In the mean time, several people have posted their setup on the 6bone
mailing list. This was very useful to me because it allowed me to
look at requirements people have.

The 6bone, certainly in its current state, is quite a bit different
from the regular IP4 network we all know. To rephrase, the 6bone 
in its current state, is
- - A virtual network
- - Exists of a dozen islands or so
- - Multiple prefixes on an island are possible
- - (for now), routes between islands are configured statically.
- - DNS IP6 is till in the startup phase and I think it's unwise to
  depend on it now.

While the IPv4 RR uses IP addresses as its main search key,
that is probably not very useful for the 6bone. Instead, 
I think that it is more important to find out about other islands
on 6bone and how to get there.

IPv6 index capabilities have been added in the RIPE database software
last week. However, at this stage the database is not as useful
as I want it to be because it is prefix-based too, and it it
not possible to ask 'give me all the islands' currently.
Also, I expect that the 6bone requirements are going to change
fairly soon as the thing evolves.
For this reason, I propose to use a public FTP server as drop-point
at this time, but at the same time keep the data in the 'database'
machine-readable as much as possible to allow for easy migration
to the database as soon as there is a need for it.
Using the FTP server now gives a little extra flexability which
is probably useful at this stage. For instance, 'mget *'
gets you a complete overview of the 6bone.

To access the FTP 'database', use the following url:
	ftp://ftp.ripe.net/ipv6/ip6rr/
While I would like to have a public writable FTP directory,
I'm concerned about people deleting files, adding 'makemoneyfast.txt'
files, etc. For this reason, I added a group password; it is OK
to publish the password on the 6bone list but it should probably
be a shared secret among list members
To get write-access, use:
	site group ip6rr
	site gpass 6bone

For those who have never used the RIPE-database before, I think that
a short introduction is helpful (while we don't use the database,
we'll use the database format). 
The attributes for objects in the database have the following format:
	attribute1:	value
	attribute2:	value
This helps to make the data machine-readable.
Attributes can be mandatory or optional.
Likewise, some attributes may only be allowed in single instances,
while other attributes can have multiple instances.

To introduce the proposed format, I'd like to show how our entry
might look like:

site:		RIPE NCC
location:	Amsterdam, The Netherlands
loc-string:	33 40 10n 117 49 20w 10m
prefix:		5f0d:0500:c100:0000/64
ping:		5f0d:0500:c100:0000::234
tunnel:		193.0.0.234 10.10.10.10 other-site
contact:	IP6 operations <ip6ops@ripe.net>
status:		example
remark:		this is only an example!
changed:	GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net 960725
source:		RIPE

Attiribute-definition:
site:	<text> [single, mandatory]
	This is the name of the 'island' in freetext format.
	Obvious examples are 'NRL', 'Digital', 'INRIA', ...

location: <text> [multiple, optional]
	This explains where the site is located.

loc-string: <text> [single, optional?]
	This is the location in lat/longitude format. 
	There is a proposal in draft-ietf-rps-location-00.txt
	which I'm copying as I have not thought about this myself yet.

prefix:	<ip6num>/<prefixlen> [multiple, mandatory]
	This documents which prefixes are used within the island.
	I hope this will be sufficient for 'route add' statements
	and the like. They should be RFC1897 addresses at this time.
	XXX ip6 compatible addresses?

ping:	<ip6num> [multiple, optional]
	Address of a host that is likely to be available to ping.

tunnel:	<myhost> <remotehost> <other-site> [multiple, mandatory]
	This documents how a tunnel is built. I'm not really
	confident if this is sufficient in all cases
	(automatic tunneling? single hosts? 'native' IPv6 lines?).
	other-site should be the name of another site: object.

contact: <rfc822-address> [multiple, mandatory]
	The contact address for this island, for setup of new
	tunnels and all that. It has been suggested to me that
	NIC-handles (or RIPE-handles) should also be accepted here;
	is this acceptable to the group?

status:	<operational/planned/down> [single, mandatory]
	The operational status of the island. 

remark:	<freetext> [multiple, optional]
	Other useful comments you may have

changed: <rfc822-address> <date-yymmdd> [multiple, mandatory]
	When the object was last changed, and by whom. While
	people are primary responsible for their objects themselves,
	experience has shown that in some cases others might
	want to make a change too. 
	If you're changing your own object, replace the changed: line;
	if you're changing someone else's, append a new line and leave
	the old one intact.

source:	<RIPE> [single, mandatory]
	This is used for for exchange of data with other databases.
	It is currently a fixed value, 'RIPE'.


Open issues:
1. I'm not confident about the tunnel syntax. I'd like to make it complete
   enough so that one stands a fighting chance setting up the local end
   of a tunnel correctly (so that one only has to send 'this is my end;
   I assume that's your end, can we tunnel') but I don't know if
   all cases can be described accurately.
   (single hosts with automatic tunneling?)
2. Do you think that the latitude/longitude thing is sufficient?
   I wouldn't know how to get to this information easily
   (the data in the example is from the draft and thus somewhere
   in California..)
3. In the 'regular' database, contact persons are split up in 
   administrative and technical contacts, and the contact names
   point recursively to 'person objects'.
   (for those who never have seen this, telnet to whois.ripe.net
   and play around if you want).
   I don't think that that approach is appropiate at this time;
   we can always migrate to it once we're using the database.
4. Work on the database version is in progress, thanks to work
   by its current maintainer, David Kessens. 
   This is an example of what is possible now:

	$ whois -h whois.ripe.net 5f0d:0500:c100:0000::/64

	inet6num:    5F0D:500:C100::0/64
	netname:     RIPE-NCC-RFC1897
	descr:       IPv6 RFC 1897 test allocation for RIPE NCC
	country:     NL
	admin-c:     GJD8
	tech-c:      GJD8
	remarks:     Experimental on 6bone!
	notify:      GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net
	changed:     geertJan.deGroot@ripe.net 960801
	source:      RIPE
	
	person:      Geert Jan de Groot
	address:     RIPE Network Coordination Centre (NCC)
	address:     Kruislaan 409
	address:     NL-1098 SJ Amsterdam
	address:     Netherlands
	phone:       +31 20 592 5065
	fax-no:      +31 20 592 5090
	e-mail:      GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net
	nic-hdl:     GJD8
	remarks:     Pager (emergencies only) +31 6 59957375
	changed:     GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net 950706
	source:      RIPE

   You'll notice that this is not a registered route but a prefix,
   but the object definition can be changed as desired.
   (oh, and David just informed me that he's working on the whois server,
   so it may not work if you'd try now; hopefully in a day or so)


That's as far as I got. Please advise if you think this is useful,
or if I'm way off. 

Geert Jan 
(with credit to David for some last-minute hacks..)


------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  2 02:15:23 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00372>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:06:04 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00364>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:05:53 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03006>; Thu, 1 Aug 1996 17:05:51 -0700
Received: from ppp2.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA18409 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Fri, 2 Aug 1996 02:05:48 +0200
Received: from berklix.ripe.net (geertj@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berklix.ripe.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA00425; Fri, 2 Aug 1996 00:15:24 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199608012215.AAA00425@berklix.ripe.net>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: 6bone DNS Servers 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 Aug 1996 12:28:38 EDT."
             <9608011628.AA29421@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 1996 00:15:23 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

(I hope this message gets reflected by the list; I'm still
having problems. Can people please ack?)

On Thu, 01 Aug 96 12:28:38 -0400  bound@zk3.dec.com wrote:
> I will be setting up our DNS Server for our AAAA records tomorrow for
> our node(s).  Who can I feed our DNS records for the 6bone?
> 
> Geert? Bill Manning?

Great!

The ip6.int records are handled by Bill. I guess that the forward
zone is something.dec.com so that can be arranged in-house by DEC?

Am I missing something?

Geert Jan

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Aug  4 16:38:28 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25077>; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 23:36:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25071>; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 23:36:10 -0700
Received: from mailhost.ipsilon.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16111>; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 23:36:10 -0700
Received: from [205.226.7.88] ([205.226.7.88]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id XAA18993; Sun, 4 Aug 1996 23:36:08 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v03007802ae2b41013000@[205.226.7.88]>
In-Reply-To: <960801011529.ZM11106@rama.imag.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 23:38:28 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels]
Cc: hinden@ipsilon.com
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Folks,

The address allocation scheme defined in RFC1897 uses the autonomous system
as the top level of the address.  The intent behind this (besides making
address allocation easy) was that there would be one route per organization
having a set of IPv6 nodes.  All of the routes in one organization
(identified by the AS number) should aggregate into one route.  Seems to me
that until we get many thousands of organizations on the 6bone, this is not
too many routes.  I even think that it would be good to get some early
experience with large IPv6 routing tables.

When the 6bone grows out of this AS style of routing, we can start
renumbering the organizations to either aggregatable AS numbers or
(probably better) real IPv6 addresses as specified in the unicast address
allocation document.  I think it will be a very good thing if we get some
early experience runumbering IPv6 nodes.  We should not try very hard to
avoid this.

From this I would see the following steps:
Status: RO

  1) Start with static routes (what we are doing today)
  2) Install RIPng on 6bone routers create a reasonable routing topology (some
     alternative paths, try to avoid multiple ocean hops)
  3) At some point (when routing tables get too big or routing traffic
     exceeds some limit) renumber the IPv6 nodes reduce the number of
     routes (greater aggregation).

Comments?

Bob




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 04:58:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03184>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:00:28 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03178>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:00:26 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28113>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:00:25 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 4393"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I7WVBSUGAC001MCB@FNAL.FNAL.GOV>;
 Mon, 05 Aug 1996 10:00:24 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id JAA20346; Mon, 05 Aug 1996 09:58:47 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 09:58:46 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels]
In-Reply-To: "04 Aug 1996 23:38:28 PDT."
 <"v03007802ae2b41013000"@[205.226.7.88]>
To: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Message-Id: <199608051458.JAA20346@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> The address allocation scheme defined in RFC1897 uses the autonomous system
> as the top level of the address.  The intent behind this (besides making
> address allocation easy) was that there would be one route per organization
> having a set of IPv6 nodes.

Actually, it says to use the AS of your provider.  Thus, even though
FNAL has an AS, I'm using an AS of ESNET's in my IPv6 prefix.

> I think it will be a very good thing if we get some early experience
> runumbering IPv6 nodes.  We should not try very hard to avoid this.

Absolutely.  If renumbering is proven to be "easy" (in some reasonable
metric), many objections vaporize.

				Matt

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 06:45:54 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03426>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:08:41 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03420>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:08:39 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28480>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:08:35 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id KAA22739; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA08737; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:45:55 -0400
Message-Id: <9608051445.AA08737@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 04 Aug 96 23:38:28 PDT."
             <v03007802ae2b41013000@[205.226.7.88]> 
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 96 10:45:54 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob
,
This sounds good to me.  One issue I just found though which is logistical 
is that I know of two customers that will ask very soon for REAL IPv6 
addresses and begin to deploy them.  They will join the 6bone and use 1897 
but clearly this will be a pain and they don't want to have to IPv6 
address AS's.

Comments?

/jim



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 01:47:13 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04994>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:47:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04988>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:47:20 -0700
Received: from mailhost.ipsilon.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00446>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:47:19 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id IAA01291; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:44:46 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v03007801ae2bc6aa7f0e@[205.226.1.20]>
In-Reply-To: <9608051445.AA08737@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
References: Your message of "Sun, 04 Aug 96 23:38:28 PDT."            
 <v03007802ae2b41013000@[205.226.7.88]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:47:13 -0700
To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels]
Cc: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jim,

>This sounds good to me.  One issue I just found though which is logistical
>is that I know of two customers that will ask very soon for REAL IPv6
>addresses and begin to deploy them.  They will join the 6bone and use 1897
>but clearly this will be a pain and they don't want to have to IPv6
>address AS's.

Yes, this would be good.  I think we need to get all of the registries
involved.  The work Geert Jan is doing at RIPE is a great first step.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 20:10:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06722>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:10:40 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06685>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:10:37 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01763>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 09:10:35 -0700
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA13015 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Mon, 5 Aug 1996 18:10:34 +0200
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by kantoor.ripe.net with ESMTP
	id QAA09477 (8.7.3/$Revision: 1.2 $); Mon, 5 Aug 1996 16:10:34 GMT
Message-Id: <199608051610.QAA09477@kantoor.ripe.net>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>, 6bone@isi.edu
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 1996 10:45:54 EDT."
             <9608051445.AA08737@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 18:10:32 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Mon, 05 Aug 96 10:45:54 -0400  bound@zk3.dec.com wrote:
> This sounds good to me.  One issue I just found though which is logistical 
> is that I know of two customers that will ask very soon for REAL IPv6 
> addresses and begin to deploy them.  They will join the 6bone and use 1897 
> but clearly this will be a pain and they don't want to have to IPv6 
> address AS's.

There is no such thing as real IPv6 addresses. It shouldn't be needed
either; if people can't renumber at the flick of a switch, then I don't
think we have met all the requirements for IPv6.

I have suggested it before, but I think it's worth repeating:
when developments gets a little further, then I think it makes
sense to make some kind of 'master-router-announcer' that would
'announce' the prefix of 6bone. This prefix would change frequently
(I'm thinking about 15 minutes, but one day is acceptable),
and the whole cloud would automatically renumber and phase out the
old prefix.

This would just be an experiment but it would make clear we're
serious about easy renumbering; also, it would make sure that
renumbering actually is simple.

Said otherwise: I don't see that using 1897 addresses would be a pain.

geert jan

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 09:48:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13229>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:49:12 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13218>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:49:05 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06618>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 10:49:02 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id NAA16988; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 13:51:56 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA14529; Mon, 5 Aug 96 13:48:59 EDT
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 96 13:48:59 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9608051748.AA14529@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels]
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Jan,

> 
> There is no such thing as real IPv6 addresses. It shouldn't be needed
> either; if people can't renumber at the flick of a switch, then I don't
> think we have met all the requirements for IPv6.
> 
> I have suggested it before, but I think it's worth repeating:
> when developments gets a little further, then I think it makes
> sense to make some kind of 'master-router-announcer' that would
> 'announce' the prefix of 6bone. This prefix would change frequently
> (I'm thinking about 15 minutes, but one day is acceptable),
> and the whole cloud would automatically renumber and phase out the
> old prefix.
> 


Given that routers don't act on Router Advertisements from other routers
I have a hard time to see how the 'master-router-announcer' can make
the whole IPv6 cloud to renumber.  As it stands now, it would require
flicks of many switches (as many as there are routers) to renumber
the entire cloud.  It might be possible (albeit hard) to renumber by commands
from a maser network management station provided we had a set of standard
configuration tools implemented by every router vendor.  But this is not
here as yet.  Any news from the IPv6 MIB WG, BTW?

Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 23:51:45 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20594>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:51:51 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20588>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:51:49 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA13044>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 12:51:47 -0700
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA14880 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Mon, 5 Aug 1996 21:51:46 +0200
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by kantoor.ripe.net with ESMTP
	id TAA10040 (8.7.3/$Revision: 1.2 $); Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:51:46 GMT
Message-Id: <199608051951.TAA10040@kantoor.ripe.net>
To: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com, 6bone@isi.edu
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 1996 08:47:13 PDT."
             <v03007801ae2bc6aa7f0e@[205.226.1.20]> 
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 21:51:45 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Mon, 5 Aug 1996 08:47:13 -0700  Bob Hinden wrote:
> >This sounds good to me.  One issue I just found though which is logistical
> >is that I know of two customers that will ask very soon for REAL IPv6
> >addresses and begin to deploy them.  They will join the 6bone and use 1897
> >but clearly this will be a pain and they don't want to have to IPv6
> >address AS's.
> 
> Yes, this would be good.  I think we need to get all of the registries
> involved.  The work Geert Jan is doing at RIPE is a great first step.

Maybe I should elaborate on my previous message.
I apologise that it's a little bit offtopic for the 6bone list,
but since the topic was brought up here, I hope this is useful.

It seems we're having different ideas on the usability of RFC1897 
addresses and the need to renumber.

As far as the registry work is concerned, we're  getting close to be able
to assign address space.  Software to register IPv6 address space is
currently experimental but initial tests work. This software is used
by the RIPE NCC, and similar code is used by APNIC; 
the Internic uses a totally different package.

A few things are missing. One is assignment guidelines; should we always
assign /64 prefiexes, and to whom? Should each department of a company
obtain its own prefix, or should they work this out internally.
Keep in mind that IMHO the IPv4 'scarcity' isn't caused by amount of
machines, but assignment efficiency; the whole Internet still fits 
in less than one A.

Another thing, and I'm really speaking outside my own department here,
is the way address space is assigned. For IPv4, the RIPE NCC only
accepts requests from contributing registries (we don't get NSF funding).
How this applies to IPv6 space, I don't know; if you want me to bring this
up internally, tell me privately. 

Personally I expected the issue of non-1897 IPv6 addresses to be 
one year away at this time.

But what I'm really concerned with is the push Jim showed to get 
'real' addresses, I assume because he didn't want his customers
to renumber.
That really scares me. One of the big plusses for IPv6 is that
renumbering is supposed to be easy. Aren't we sending out the wrong
message if for initial deployment, we publically push for
'final' IPv6 assignments? 
Don't get me wrong: I think that having first customers using 
this 'for real' is quite a result, but I'm concerned about 
the precedent it sets and the message it sends out.

That's why I'm not very enthousiastic about non-1897 addresses.
If I'm dead wrong, enlighten me.

Geert Jan


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 18:28:11 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08125>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:38:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08117>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:37:52 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01286>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:37:50 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id WAA12862; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:28:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA17088; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:28:12 -0400
Message-Id: <9608060228.AA17088@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 96 18:10:32 +0200."
             <199608051610.QAA09477@kantoor.ripe.net> 
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 96 22:28:11 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Geert,

>> This sounds good to me.  One issue I just found though which is logistical 
>> is that I know of two customers that will ask very soon for REAL IPv6 
>> addresses and begin to deploy them.  They will join the 6bone and use 1897 
>> but clearly this will be a pain and they don't want to have to IPv6 
>> address AS's.
>
>There is no such thing as real IPv6 addresses. It shouldn't be needed
>either; if people can't renumber at the flick of a switch, then I don't
>think we have met all the requirements for IPv6.

Even with IPv6 its still going to be painful.  If customers are going to
move to IPv6 they will want to avoid instantaneous renumbering.  We need
to be realistic here.

I have an idea.  Stay tuned.

So your not going to set up the registries as Bob pointed out?

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug  5 18:55:28 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08526>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 20:07:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08520>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 20:07:14 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02137>; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 20:07:11 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id WAA10147; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:55:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA16798; Mon, 5 Aug 1996 22:55:28 -0400
Message-Id: <9608060255.AA16798@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 96 21:51:45 +0200."
             <199608051951.TAA10040@kantoor.ripe.net> 
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 96 22:55:28 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Geert,

I can renuber any link with stateless or DHCPv6 pretty easy.  I think
with OSPFv6 I can probably do it quite well with the LSPs using
link-local addresses instead of global addresses.  So for sure the
infrastructure of IPv6 will work well.  But that does not account for
many other things.

1.  I still don't have away to propogate my prefix from the ISP to my
backbone.

2.  If you read the PIER reqs its dependent on hosts changing lots of
stuff and routers to make renumbering pleasant.  I think it will take at
least 2 years for vendors to get smart and wake up to those changes and
get them in "real" products.

3.  I think customers want IPv6 RIGHT NOW and as far as they are
concerned the Internet has already melted down.  They are going to build
their Intranets with IPv6 if they can.  They would like to understand
how they will get the prefixes in their routers (for stateless) and
servers (for DHCPv6).  They don't want to depend on 1897 to build a real
IPv6 back-bone network.  I think a year is reasonable as it will take
them that long to get up to speed.  I will also tell you that there is a
bunch of unhappy users out there who have been given a load of garbage
about IPv6 from someone.  I have just connected with 3 large fortune 100
and International accounts as they wanted to talk to the engineer and me
directly.  They want IPv6 and they want it right now.  If they have to
they will replace existing equipment from people who don't support it.
This is what I predicted would happen and force the market 3 years ago.
I think its going to happen very quickly.

This is why we cannot treat the 6bone as the Mbone.  The Mbone is very
useful but I don't have customers asking me to put it into the very
heart of their network backbones.  For IPv6 I do.  Note Dynamic DNS
Updates is another one RIGHT NOW.  

To make matters better.  I am going to take the time to train at least
15 Tech Support folks who will each train 15 more and 15 more etc.  In
addition in the U.S. from Sept - Dec 1996 there will be an intensive
IPv6 set of Seminars across the U.S. in most major cities.  So by Jan 97
I think we will have a greater req for IPv6 in the market.  This way I
can stay home and do what I like which is engineering.

4. The last thing is the idea of renumbering.  Its a lot of up front
work for the customer.  Its like trying to get user requirements out of
them for an application.  They want to spend as little time with that as
possible.  

Even with IPv6 it just is not as easy as our mail makes it sound here or
on PIER.  With IPv4 I have been told they will not even bother and just
move to IPv6.  

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Aug  6 21:29:33 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29151>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:29:51 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29145>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:29:45 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29782>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 10:29:39 -0700
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA13359 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Tue, 6 Aug 1996 19:29:38 +0200
Received: from kantoor.ripe.net by kantoor.ripe.net with ESMTP
	id RAA01549 (8.7.3/$Revision: 1.2 $); Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:29:37 GMT
Message-Id: <199608061729.RAA01549@kantoor.ripe.net>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels] 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 1996 22:28:11 EDT."
             <9608060228.AA17088@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 19:29:33 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Mon, 05 Aug 96 22:28:11 -0400  bound@zk3.dec.com wrote:
> >There is no such thing as real IPv6 addresses. It shouldn't be needed
> >either; if people can't renumber at the flick of a switch, then I don't
> >think we have met all the requirements for IPv6.
> 
> Even with IPv6 its still going to be painful.  If customers are going to
> move to IPv6 they will want to avoid instantaneous renumbering.  We need
> to be realistic here.
> 
> So your not going to set up the registries as Bob pointed out?

If you need non-RFC1897 IPv6 addresses, I think you should talk to IANA
as IANA has not mandated the registries to do that yet. As I explained,
some things are simply not set up for it yet, and the best way to 
make this going is to talk to Jon.

On the other hand, I don't see much advantage to using different
addresses. 1897 addresses are globally unique, don't have a fixed
lifetime (they will disappear someday, but not in the forseeable
future - they aren't net39 addresses with a fixed 'no good after' date). 

What _is_ lacking is aggregation possibilities. 
However, should 'real' address space be assigned at this time,
then these addresses would not be aggregatable either, so
unfortunately it looks like your customers will need to renumber
anyway. Can you provide technical motivation why renumbering from
'real' addresses would be better than renumbering from 1897 addresses?

Again, please talk to Jon about your needs. It hasn't been discussed much
between IANA and the regional registries yet, so if you want to
start it, go ahead. Please understand that I don't want to hamper you
but I'm just asking the same questions Jon would probably do.

geert jan

(I'd like to take this offline, is that OK?)


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Aug  6 05:01:23 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05722>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:01:41 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05713>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:01:39 -0700
Received: from mailhost.ipsilon.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05242>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:01:39 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id LAA25729; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 11:58:56 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v03007822ae2d46309a95@[205.226.1.20]>
In-Reply-To: <199608061729.RAA01549@kantoor.ripe.net>
References: Your message of "Mon, 05 Aug 1996 22:28:11 EDT."            
 <9608060228.AA17088@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 12:01:23 -0700
To: bound@zk3.dec.com, Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: Re: 6bone Routing [was RIPng & tunnels]
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Geert Jan, Jim,

>Again, please talk to Jon about your needs. It hasn't been discussed much
>between IANA and the regional registries yet, so if you want to
>start it, go ahead. Please understand that I don't want to hamper you
>but I'm just asking the same questions Jon would probably do.

I will start a converstion with Jon.  I think it is time we get this started.

In the mean time, we should all continue using the RFC1897 style addresses.
We should not slow the 6bone effor down waiting for registry assigned
addresses to appear.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Aug  6 16:08:29 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21112>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:08:35 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21106>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:08:33 -0700
Received: from merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20963>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:08:32 -0700
Received: from herman.merit.edu (masaki@herman.merit.edu [198.108.60.143]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id UAA25901; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 20:08:30 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608070008.UAA25901@merit.edu>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 25 Jul 1996 19:14:17 EDT."
             <199607252314.TAA22654@home.merit.edu> 
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:08:29 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folks,

I previously reported how to make a configured tunnel on inria
ipv6 freebsd version, but I found another better way.

If you use a configuration similar to that I posted before, you
will see that all outgoing packets generated on that machine for
the configured tunnel have a compatible address as its source,
which means that returning packets will be through automatic
tunneling. I learned how the inria ipv6 implemented configured
tunneling, and found the following way.

ifconfig sit0 inet6 fe80::c0:f000:e59a
route -n add -inet6 -net fe80::c051:6042/128 ::192.168.10.103
ifconfig sit0 inet6 5f00:ed00:c66c:3c00::153
route -n add -inet6 -net 5f00:ed00:c0a8:0a00::/80 ::192.168.10.103

In this case, the destination has a link-local address as well as
a global one. When sending a packet destined to one of them, its
source address will be corresponding one. I believe this doesn't
affect automatic tunneling.

Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Aug  6 16:17:10 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21533>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:17:21 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21527>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:17:20 -0700
Received: from merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21398>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:17:19 -0700
Received: from herman.merit.edu (masaki@herman.merit.edu [198.108.60.143]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id UAA26022; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 20:17:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608070017.UAA26022@merit.edu>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?= <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: How to configure a tunnel 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 Jul 1996 19:06:09 +0900."
             <12133.838721169@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp> 
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:17:10 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kazu,

I wrote this a couple of days ago, but it seems I've forgot to
send.

> Gee. Why don't you, a member of WIDE project, use one of WIDE
> implementations? Actually Nara implementation provides a good
> and

I personally tried. You may remember I asked you. Our main
purpose is to implement ipv6 routing protocols, currently working
on ripng, so we'll use an ipv6 kernel which provides functions we
need. INRIA version is almost enough. I tried Solaris one, but I
need to wait its next release due to luck of setsockopt extension
for ipv6 multicasting, although their ripng is working on solaris.

To implement ripng, we need,

o Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6 defined in the draft,
o ipv6 extension to socket ioctl's to obtain interface info, 
o ipv6 extension to access method to kernel resident routing table,
o ipv6 link-local multicasting and related setsockopt functions, and
o handling link-local addresses properly with Neighbor Discovery
  even in case of multiple ethernet interfaces.

Ripng on solaris sends an update packet with a global ipv6
address as its source, and our current implementation does so.
Ripng ID says that a link-local address must be used. So,
capability to bind a socket with a link-local address will be
needed. And also, the routing daemon wants to identify the
incoming interface even for packets with a link-local source
address. Neighbor Discovery may be able to ask all the interfaces
where that link-local address is on (although the cache may
answer). I know INRIA version does well in part.

When these become available on your implementation, I'd like to
try it. Thanks.

Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Aug  6 16:27:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22035>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:29:43 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22028>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:29:38 -0700
Received: from merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21910>; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 17:29:37 -0700
Received: from herman.merit.edu (masaki@herman.merit.edu [198.108.60.143]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id UAA26124; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 20:27:04 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608070027.UAA26124@merit.edu>
To: shand@shand.reo.dec.com (Mike Shand REO2 G/C2 DTN:830-4424)
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 01 Aug 1996 10:53:47 BST."
             <9608010953.AA12503@shand.reo.dec.com> 
Date: Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:27:04 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folks,

We made ripng in MRT able to work even on configured
tunneling. As I reported just before, we can use both link-local
and global addresses on a configured tunnel of inria ipv6.

We currently use the same link-local address with one of ethernet
interfaces attached. I think it's OK because the destination
address should be used to identify interfaces in case of
point-to-point. It seems that the draft "Identifying IPv6
Interfaces in Link-Local Addresses" doesn't say about
poin-to-point network like the ripng draft doesn't.

I hope inria ipv6 provides pseudo interfaces which correspond
each configured tunnels respectively so that a routing daemon can
easily know its configuration and status. And, I also hope the
kernel automatically (or provides a way to) switch a source
address of outgoing packets to a link-local address even in case
of the packet destined to a link-local multicasting address.

I haven't made our code to use multicasting on a configured
tunnel because I understood it doesn't matter for now. However, I
believe the kernel should support multicasting even on a
configured tunnel because it will help introducing global
multicasting over the 6bone. I think we will not build 6Mbone
over 6bone.

Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug  7 12:19:50 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20926>; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:03:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20920>; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:03:24 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27882>; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 12:03:22 -0700
Received: from berklix.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA05962 (5.65a/NCC-2.36); Wed, 7 Aug 1996 21:03:20 +0200
Received: from berklix.ripe.net (geertj@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berklix.ripe.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA00204; Wed, 7 Aug 1996 10:19:51 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199608070819.KAA00204@berklix.ripe.net>
To: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:27:04 EDT."
             <199608070027.UAA26124@merit.edu> 
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 10:19:50 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Tue, 06 Aug 1996 20:27:04 -0400  Masaki Hirabaru wrote:
> We made ripng in MRT able to work even on configured
> tunneling. As I reported just before, we can use both link-local
> and global addresses on a configured tunnel of inria ipv6.

Can you make this code available somewhere?

Geert Jan


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  8 08:04:26 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27001>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:05:09 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26985>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:05:07 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09933>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:05:05 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <14989(6)>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:04:48 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:04:26 PDT
To: shand@shand.reo.dec.com (Mike Shand REO2 G/C2 DTN:830-4424 Mike Shand REO2 G/C2 DTN:830-4424)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: shand's message of Thu, 01 Aug 96 02:53:47 -0800.
             <9608010953.AA12503@shand.reo.dec.com> 
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:04:26 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Aug8.150426pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Mike,

> > I want to know how they implement ripng on a tunnel. ...
> 
> Well, we don't at the moment. At first sight it seems pretty trivial.
> You just define a pseudo pt-pt interface for the tunnel and run
> RIPng (or whatever other routing protocol you fancy) over that 
> interface. Presumably you assign a link local address by whatever
> means you would normally use for a pt-pt (e.g. PPP) link.

Whether or not the endpoints of a tunnel need their own link-local addresses
is an open issue.  I don't think RIPng should require that, since RIP
classically has operated fine over unnumbered p-to-p links.

> There would be no broadcast/multicasting.

Well, there's no broadcasting since IPv6 does not have broadcast addresses.
But RIPng might as well use its assigned IPv6 link-scope multicast address
for messages sent to neighbors across across p-to-p links, including tunnels,
just like on multi-access links.  The implementation of multicast on a p-to-p
link is a trivial and degenerate -- just send the packet to the other end of
the link.

> Suppose the IPv4 tunnel becomes unidirectional, either because it was
> wrongly configured, or because the underlying IPv4 routing becomes
> unidirectional. Do we need any special mehanisms to dectect such
> misconfiguiration?

Yes, I think it's important to be able to detect one-way link or interface
failures, regardless of link type.  A few of us here at PARC are currently
implementing an experimental "RIPng++" which has support for that, plus
several other extensions.  We plan to test it out on DARTnet before deciding
which specific extensions to suggest for RIPng itself.

> Do we need to send router advertisements over such a link which should
> only have another router at the other end? Presumably so, since it could
> in theory be a host running RIP in listen mode (say). etc. etc.

I hope we can get away from the use of routing-protocol-snooping by hosts.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  8 15:32:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01093>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 16:32:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01087>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 16:32:05 -0700
Received: from merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA13911>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 16:32:04 -0700
Received: from herman.merit.edu (masaki@herman.merit.edu [198.108.60.143]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id TAA28851; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 19:32:00 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608082332.TAA28851@merit.edu>
To: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Mrt's ripng code updated (Re: RIPng )
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 Aug 1996 10:19:50 +0200."
             <199608070819.KAA00204@berklix.ripe.net> 
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 19:32:00 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Geert Jan and 6bone folks,

I placed the latest mrt code on:

ftp://ftp.merit.edu/net-research/mrt/mrt-1.2A.freebsd.tar.gz

Mrt's home page is http://compute.merit.edu/mrt/, but this
release is not linked from the page. This page has general
information about mrt, but I haven't updated any document related
to this ripng code. Ripng is one of protocols mrt supports.

This release has binaries compiled which run on inria ipv6
freebsd boxes.

1) change your directory to src/programs/mrt, 
2) check its default config named "config", 
   whose syntax is like cisco's, and
3) run mrt.

You can check mrt's routing table by doing "telnet localhost
5674", then typing "show ripng route" like cisco. Be careful, no
security for now.

For test, -v (verbose) and -n (not install routes into kernel)
options are available when invoking mrt.

Our code currently depends on inria's implementation of
configured tunnel. When mrt receives a route via a tunnel, mrt
has to swap its actual nexthop with nexthop's compatible address
because a configured tunnel by inria is not a interface, but just
a route.

Of course, before running mrt, you should change your configured
tunnel to use a global ipv6 address as I posted before.

Mrt doesn't obtain routing information from the kernel when
starting. This is under development, so don't expect much
functions, please.

Enjoy.
Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  8 23:17:38 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08534>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 20:25:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08528>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 20:25:17 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00384>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 20:25:16 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id XAA19209; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 23:21:28 -0400
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Received: from dhaskin.baynetworks.com (eng_ppp41) by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA25242; Thu, 8 Aug 96 23:18:28 EDT
Message-Id: <9608090318.AA25242@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <dhaskin@pobox>
To: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 23:17:38 +0000
Subject: Re: RIPng 
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, shand@shand.reo.dec.com
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 
> From:          Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>

> 
> Whether or not the endpoints of a tunnel need their own link-local addresses
> is an open issue.  I don't think RIPng should require that, since RIP
> classically has operated fine over unnumbered p-to-p links.
> 

I believe it would be much cleaner to require all interfaces 
including tunnels to have link-local addresses.  This way no special 
considerations have to be applied to p-to-p links.  Address tokens can 
be trivially generated for tunnel interfaces (e.g. use a local IPv4 
address for an IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnel or the token of the encapsulating 
interface for a IPV6-in-IPv6 tunnel).  What are benefits of the totally 
unnumbered IPv6 interfaces? I guess link-local address space 
conservation is not one of them :)

> ..
> Yes, I think it's important to be able to detect one-way link or interface
> failures, regardless of link type.  A few of us here at PARC are currently
> implementing an experimental "RIPng++" which has support for that, plus
> several other extensions.  We plan to test it out on DARTnet before deciding
> which specific extensions to suggest for RIPng itself.
> 

I thought NUD as specified in the ND spec could be quite sufficiently 
used on all types of links to verify two-way reachability.  Am I missing 
something?

> Steve
> 
Dimitry 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug  8 14:41:31 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10382>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:52 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10376>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:50 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA11838>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:49 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15426(4)>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:47 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:31 PDT
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, shand@shand.reo.dec.com, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: dhaskin's message of Thu, 08 Aug 96 16:17:38 -0800.
             <9608090318.AA25242@pobox.BayNetworks.com> 
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:41:31 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Aug8.214131pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dimitry,

> I believe it would be much cleaner to require all interfaces 
> including tunnels to have link-local addresses.  This way no special 
> considerations have to be applied to p-to-p links.  Address tokens can 
> be trivially generated for tunnel interfaces (e.g. use a local IPv4 
> address for an IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnel or the token of the encapsulating 
> interface for a IPV6-in-IPv6 tunnel).  What are benefits of the totally 
> unnumbered IPv6 interfaces? I guess link-local address space 
> conservation is not one of them :)

Sounds reasonable to me.  I suppose we should move this discussion to the
main IPng list, to see if anyone has any killer counter-arguments.

> > Yes, I think it's important to be able to detect one-way link or interface
> > failures, regardless of link type.  A few of us here at PARC are currently
> > implementing an experimental "RIPng++" which has support for that, plus
> > several other extensions.  We plan to test it out on DARTnet before
> > deciding which specific extensions to suggest for RIPng itself.
> 
> I thought NUD as specified in the ND spec could be quite sufficiently 
> used on all types of links to verify two-way reachability.  Am I missing 
> something?

I don't think NUD is sufficient on multi-access links to verify that
multicast routing updates are reaching all neighboring routers.  NUD
serves to detect the unreachability only of those destinations or next-
hop routers to which one is sending unicast packets.  So yes, we could
depend on NUD on p-to-p links and tunnels, if we specified that RIPng
must use unicast destination addresses over those types of links; however,
we'd still have to employ a different strategy on multi-access links, and
presumably that same strategy would also work in the degenerate case
of a p-to-p link without requiring it to be treated as a special case.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 22:48:55 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10964>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:58:32 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA10957>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:58:30 -0700
Received: from onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA12313>; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 21:58:27 -0700
Received: from onoe2 by onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp (8.7.5/Sony6.1MX) with ESMTP id NAA21646; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 13:48:56 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199608090448.NAA21646@onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp>
To: deering@parc.xerox.com
Cc: shand@shand.reo.dec.com, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:04:26 PDT"
References: <96Aug8.150426pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.03 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 96 13:48:55 +0900
From: Atsushi Onoe <onoe@sm.sony.co.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> Whether or not the endpoints of a tunnel need their own link-local addresses
> is an open issue.  I don't think RIPng should require that, since RIP
> classically has operated fine over unnumbered p-to-p links.

In addition, I don't think RIPng should require link-local addresses
even over multicast network.

If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
source address with address of interface.

Currently, routed require special interface to determine the
interface (ask ND, or extented recvfrom()).

Atsushi Onoe, WIDE Project

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 16:17:12 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19865>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 05:20:13 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19859>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 05:20:03 -0700
Received: from unidhp1.uni-c.dk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23712>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 05:19:59 -0700
Received: by unidhp1.uni-c.dk
	(1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA155233033; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:17:13 +0200
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:17:12 +0200 (METDST)
From: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
To: JOIN Project Team <join@uni-muenster.de>, Herluf Hansen <hha@tbit.dk>,
        Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>,
        Masaki Minami <minami@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Cc: 6bone Mailer <6bone@ISI.EDU>
Subject: UNI-C ipv6 web server
Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960809135601.13843C@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hello,

   I've set up an ipv6 web server giving status of the IPv6
activities at UNI-C. Please try it, 

   http://www6.ipv6.uni-c.dk/      ipv6
   http://www.ipv6.uni-c.dk/       ipv4


   regards,

---------------- oo000oo ----------------------------------
Gudrun Dalgeir             phone  : (+) 45 35878532
UNI-C                      fax    : (+) 45 35878890
Vermundsgade 5             e-mail : Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk
DK-2100 Kbh. O             
-----------------------------------------------------------


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 06:19:30 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22288>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:19:43 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22282>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:19:41 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27266>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:19:39 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id KAA02295; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 10:22:30 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA12922; Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:19:30 EDT
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:19:30 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9608091419.AA12922@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Steve,

> > 
> > I thought NUD as specified in the ND spec could be quite sufficiently 
> > used on all types of links to verify two-way reachability.  Am I missing 
> > something?
> 
> I don't think NUD is sufficient on multi-access links to verify that
> multicast routing updates are reaching all neighboring routers.  NUD
> serves to detect the unreachability only of those destinations or next-
> hop routers to which one is sending unicast packets.  So yes, we could
> depend on NUD on p-to-p links and tunnels, if we specified that RIPng
> must use unicast destination addresses over those types of links; however,
> we'd still have to employ a different strategy on multi-access links, and
> presumably that same strategy would also work in the degenerate case
> of a p-to-p link without requiring it to be treated as a special case.

I'm not sure that a router sending multicast routing updates should ever care
if his updates are reaching all neighboring routers (and if he learned that they
don't, what he is going to do about that?).  But receivers of routing
updates should be able to verify that they can reach the advertising router
if they chose to send traffic through it.  NUD is quite sufficient for
that.  And,  if a router relying on the reception of routing updates does
not get them or can't use them for lack of reachability to the advertiser,
someone will scream rather sooner than later. 

> Steve
> 
Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 06:32:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22780>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:33:45 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22769>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:33:41 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27761>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 07:33:39 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id KAA02747; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 10:36:05 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA13906; Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:32:47 EDT
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:32:47 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9608091432.AA13906@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: onoe@sm.sony.co.jp
Subject: Re: RIPng
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


> > Whether or not the endpoints of a tunnel need their own link-local addresses
> > is an open issue.  I don't think RIPng should require that, since RIP
> > classically has operated fine over unnumbered p-to-p links.
> 
> In addition, I don't think RIPng should require link-local addresses
> even over multicast network.
>
Well.. this would be fundamental deviation from the ND requirements.

> If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
> routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
> source address with address of interface.
>
The source address IS the address of the interface where RIPng comes from.

> Currently, routed require special interface to determine the
> interface (ask ND, or extented recvfrom()).
>
It sounds that routed is fundamentally broken.

> Atsushi Onoe, WIDE Project
>
Dimitry 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 01:20:41 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24966>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:33:05 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24904>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:32:40 -0700
Received: from mailhost.ipsilon.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29942>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:32:39 -0700
Received: from [205.226.1.20] (acacia.Ipsilon.COM [205.226.1.20]) by mailhost.Ipsilon.COM (8.6.11/8.6.10) with ESMTP id IAA06805; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:28:13 -0700
X-Sender: hinden@mailhost.ipsilon.com
Message-Id: <v0300780cae3106a5f05d@[205.226.1.20]>
In-Reply-To: <199608090448.NAA21646@onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp>
References: Your message of "Thu, 8 Aug 1996 15:04:26 PDT"
 <96Aug8.150426pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:20:41 -0700
To: Atsushi Onoe <onoe@sm.sony.co.jp>
From: Bob Hinden <hinden@ipsilon.com>
Subject: Re: RIPng
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com, shand@shand.reo.dec.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Atsushi,

>In addition, I don't think RIPng should require link-local addresses
>even over multicast network.

One of the motivations for RIPng (and other routing protocols) using
link-local addresses for exchanging routing information between nodes
running RIPng is to make it possible to renumber with out breaking the
routing adjacencies.  This is,  at least to me, an important capability.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 08:22:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03093>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:23:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03087>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:23:11 -0700
Received: from merit.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02516>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:23:10 -0700
Received: from herman.merit.edu (masaki@herman.merit.edu [198.108.60.143]) by merit.edu (8.7.5/merit-2.0) with SMTP id MAA09422; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 12:22:54 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199608091622.MAA09422@merit.edu>
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Cc: onoe@sm.sony.co.jp, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 09 Aug 1996 10:32:47 EDT."
             <9608091432.AA13906@pobox.BayNetworks.com> 
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 1996 12:22:53 -0400
From: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> > If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
> > routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
> > source address with address of interface.
> >
> The source address IS the address of the interface where RIPng comes from.

Current my solution is to let the ripng daemon know the
(link-local) address of the other end in configuration. When
receiving a ripng packet, the ripng daemon checks if its source
address is the destination address of one of tunnels, if fails
then asks ND. I'm not sure that letting the daemon know a remote
link-local address is good thing or not, but there is no ND
available on a tunnel.

> > Currently, routed require special interface to determine the
> > interface (ask ND, or extented recvfrom()).
> >
> It sounds that routed is fundamentally broken.
> 
> > Atsushi Onoe, WIDE Project
> >
> Dimitry 

On inria ipv6, they intend to use ND. Its method I saw in its
ping6 code is to try connect() and then getsockname() in order to
know the local interface where the sender host is on.

Masaki

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 02:28:58 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03266>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03245>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:22 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02733>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:21 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15220(8)>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:09 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:28:58 PDT
To: Atsushi Onoe <onoe@sm.sony.co.jp>
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: onoe's message of Fri, 09 Aug 96 09:19:22 -0800.
             <199608091619.BAA26015@onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp> 
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:28:58 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Aug9.092858pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> We perhaps needs some extensions to bsd-api spec to determine interface
> where datagram comes in.

Exactly!

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Aug 10 10:19:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03280>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:58 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03269>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:56 -0700
Received: from onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02753>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:29:54 -0700
Received: from onoe2 by onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp (8.7.5/Sony6.1MX) with ESMTP id BAA26015; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 01:19:22 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199608091619.BAA26015@onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp>
To: hinden@ipsilon.com
Cc: deering@parc.xerox.com, shand@shand.reo.dec.com, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: RIPng
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 9 Aug 1996 08:20:41 -0700"
References: <v0300780cae3106a5f05d@[205.226.1.20]>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.03 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 96 01:19:22 +0900
From: Atsushi Onoe <onoe@sm.sony.co.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

> One of the motivations for RIPng (and other routing protocols) using
> link-local addresses for exchanging routing information between nodes
> running RIPng is to make it possible to renumber with out breaking the
> routing adjacencies.  This is,  at least to me, an important capability.

Well... it sounds reasonable.  We perhaps needs some extensions to
bsd-api	spec to determine interface where datagram comes in.

Anyway, we are now implementing RIPng based on current RIPng draft,
and it will be available soon.

Atsushi


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 07:06:10 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17006>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17000>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:45 -0700
Received: from alpha.Xerox.COM by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA15843>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:43 -0700
Received: from digit.parc.xerox.com ([13.2.117.114]) by alpha.xerox.com with SMTP id <15442(7)>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:27 PDT
Received: from localhost by digit.parc.xerox.com with SMTP id <75270>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:11 PDT
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: dhaskin's message of Fri, 09 Aug 96 07:19:30 -0800.
             <9608091419.AA12922@pobox.BayNetworks.com> 
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:06:10 PDT
From: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Message-Id: <96Aug9.140611pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dimitry,

> I'm not sure that a router sending multicast routing updates should ever care
> if his updates are reaching all neighboring routers (and if he learned that
> they don't, what he is going to do about that?).

Well, there are examples in multicast routing (e.g., broadcast-and-prune
style algorithms like DVMRP or PIM-DM), where I might end up waiting for
a prune from a neighbor that I can hear, but who can't hear me and will
therefore never send a prune.  If I don't happen to also have any unicast
traffic to send via that router, then NUD won't help me detect the failure.

But for the case of unicast routing (like RIPng), I think you're right --
doing NUD on the forwarded traffic would suffice.  In which case, it becomes
a question of whether or not it still might be better to use some other
approach -- I have always thought that routing protocols either do or ought
to do their own neighbor reachability verification, and that the need for
NUD in IPv6 was to handle the case where one or both of the neighbors is
a host.  I should probably flush that particular mindset.  But first, let
me explain what I had in mind, and let me know what you think.

What we are were planning on doing as part of our RIPng++ experiment was
to add periodic RIP Hello messages, which would carry a list of all routers
on that link from whom the sending router had heard a Hello within the last
n seconds (n = some small multiple of the Hello interval); if Router A fails
to see its own address in the Hellos from Router B, that indicates that
B cannot hear A and, therefore, A should ignore B's routing advertisements.
Relative to using NUD, this scheme would appear to have the following
advantages:

	- fewer packets than NUD on a busy link: N Hellos per interval,
	  instead of up to 2N(N-1) ND packets per interval; note that,
	  as in the router->host case, router->router NUD cannot take
	  advantage of upper-layer info to suppress the NUD pings.

	- can detect failure of a neighbor *before* sending any packets
	  to it, and therefore need not drop or delay any data packets
	  while waiting for NUD to time out.

The latter point seems important for RIP -- I can know not to update my
routing table with info from a deaf neighbor who offers the shortest path
to a given destination, rather than doing the table update and then later
learning that the neighbor is deaf when I send data packets into that black
hole (and then I have to remember not to believe subsequewnt routing messages
from that deaf neighbor, at least not for a while [in case it recovers its
hearing], ...).

The disadvantage of my proposal is that it is an additional mechanism that
is not strictly necessary.

> And, if a router relying on the reception of routing updates does
> not get them or can't use them for lack of reachability to the advertiser,
> someone will scream rather sooner than later. 

I'd like to do better than waiting for someone to scream.  We had an incident
here where an Ethernet board went dead in one direction in a machine
running mrouted, which caused a multicast packet loop that was very nasty
and very hard to diagnose.  I would have been much happier having my
router scream at me (via its logging mechanism) and eliminate the loop,
than having the users screaming at me.

Steve


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 13:08:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17964>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:19:02 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17950>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:18:58 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16561>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 14:18:57 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id RAA03882; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:08:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA11827; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 17:08:05 -0400
Message-Id: <9608092108.AA11827@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Atsushi Onoe <onoe@sm.sony.co.jp>
Cc: hinden@ipsilon.com, deering@parc.xerox.com, shand@shand.reo.dec.com,
        6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 10 Aug 96 01:19:22 +0900."
             <199608091619.BAA26015@onoe2.sm.sony.co.jp> 
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 96 17:08:04 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

You will see an extended API spec that supports interfaces by Mid
September and hopefully earlier.   And other parts too. 

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug  9 23:26:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07836>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 23:26:32 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07830>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 23:26:31 -0700
Received: from mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (fsb1.aist-nara.ac.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08932>; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 23:26:28 -0700
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mailgate.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.6.10+2.5Wb1/2.8Wb/NAIST-1.6[gate])
	id PAA27776; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 15:26:26 +0900
Received: from mine.aist-nara.ac.jp by mine.aist-nara.ac.jp (8.7.3/2.7W-AIST/1.3)
	id GAA20785; Sat, 10 Aug 1996 06:23:39 GMT
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:32:47 EDT"
References: <9608091432.AA13906@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.06 on Emacs 19.28.2, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 15:23:39 +0900
Message-Id: <20782.839658219@mine.aist-nara.ac.jp>
From: Kazuhiko Yamamoto =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Subject: Re: RIPng
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 96 10:32:47 EDT

> > If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
> > routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
> > source address with address of interface.
> >
> The source address IS the address of the interface where RIPng comes from.

I don't understand this. If a source address is link-local, the
address isn't unique over multiple links.  So, we can't figure out the
interface where the packet comes from by checking only the source
address.

If routed opens one socket per one neighbor, we can figure out an
input interface:

	(1) BSD implementation saves a pointer to the input interface
	   in mbuf(i.e. the received packet).
	(2) Find a PCB where not only group addresses match but also
	   a pointer in PCB and the pointer in the packet match.
	   (Of course, we need to modify the PCB data structure.)
	(3) Pass the packet to routed via the PCB. The socket tells
	   routed the neighbor which sent the packet.

Unfortunately, some routing daemon don't take this way. That is, just
open one unbinded-and-unconnected socket for all neighbors then use
sendto() function. So, Atushi said that we need a new API.

This problem can be generalized to "an address scope problem" which
the Internet has not experienced. We WIDE project had two meetings to
discuss this problem but we have not achieved even rough consensus
yet. 

It is felt that there are many models for address scope and each has
both advantages and disadvantages. I'm now hesitating to submit an ID
about this problem which I wrote weeks ago. WIDE project is planning
to have one more meeting on this problem around 8/23.

--Kazu

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Aug 11 12:44:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05931>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:45:51 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05925>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:45:50 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17098>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:45:48 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id MAA07855; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:48:47 -0400
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Received: from dhaskin.baynetworks.com (eng_ppp28) by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA19278; Sun, 11 Aug 96 12:45:44 EDT
Message-Id: <9608111645.AA19278@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <dhaskin@pobox>
To: Steve Deering <deering@parc.xerox.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:44:49 +0000
Subject: Re: RIPng 
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 
Steve,

> Dimitry,
> 
> > I'm not sure that a router sending multicast routing updates should ever care
> > if his updates are reaching all neighbouring routers (and if he learned that
> > they don't, what he is going to do about that?).
> 
> Well, there are examples in multicast routing (e.g., broadcast-and-prune
> style algorithms like DVMRP or PIM-DM), where I might end up waiting for
> a prune from a neighbor that I can hear, but who can't hear me and will
> therefore never send a prune.  If I don't happen to also have any unicast
> traffic to send via that router, then NUD won't help me detect the failure.
>
I was talking about RIPng.  I agree if a routing  protocol 
(unicast or multicast) relies on two-way communications for its 
integrity it should be able to detect failures in such communications.

> But for the case of unicast routing (like RIPng), I think you're right --
> doing NUD on the forwarded traffic would suffice.  In which case, it becomes
> a question of whether or not it still might be better to use some other
> approach -- I have always thought that routing protocols either do or ought
> to do their own neighbor reachability verification, and that the need for
> NUD in IPv6 was to handle the case where one or both of the neighbors is
> a host.  I should probably flush that particular mindset.  But first, let
> me explain what I had in mind, and let me know what you think.
> 
> What we are were planning on doing as part of our RIPng++ experiment was
> to add periodic RIP Hello messages, which would carry a list of all routers
> on that link from whom the sending router had heard a Hello within the last
> n seconds (n = some small multiple of the Hello interval); if Router A fails
> to see its own address in the Hellos from Router B, that indicates that
> B cannot hear A and, therefore, A should ignore B's routing advertisements.
> Relative to using NUD, this scheme would appear to have the following
> advantages:
> 
> 	- fewer packets than NUD on a busy link: N Hellos per interval,
> 	  instead of up to 2N(N-1) ND packets per interval; note that,
> 	  as in the router->host case, router->router NUD cannot take
> 	  advantage of upper-layer info to suppress the NUD pings.
> 
> 	- can detect failure of a neighbor *before* sending any packets
> 	  to it, and therefore need not drop or delay any data packets
> 	  while waiting for NUD to time out.
> 
> The latter point seems important for RIP -- I can know not to update my
> routing table with info from a deaf neighbor who offers the shortest path
> to a given destination, rather than doing the table update and then later
> learning that the neighbor is deaf when I send data packets into that black
> hole (and then I have to remember not to believe subsequewnt routing messages
> from that deaf neighbor, at least not for a while [in case it recovers its
> hearing], ...).
> 
> The disadvantage of my proposal is that it is an additional mechanism that
> is not strictly necessary.
>
It seems as a nice simple mechanism.  As far as RIPng is concerned, 
I have the following reservations:

- in places where RIP is still used between routers most of the 
routers (typically in stubs domains) don't generate routing 
advertisements themselves but only listen to RIP advertisements 
from one or two routers in a transit domain.  In such typical setups 
the proposed mechanism would not work unless you also require for 
RIP updates to be always sent even if only empty one.

- I view RIPv6 as a temporary solution for routing exchange between 
routers -- only to buy time until OSPFv6 and IDRP are developed. If 
you agree with this premiss, it would be difficult to justify an 
additional effort beyond research purposes to improve RIPv6 in its
operation between routers.  As far as RIP snooping by hosts, it is 
quite common today and I believe, good or bad, it, the most probably, 
will continue to be used in IPv6 by multihomed hosts.  Your proposal 
would not not help here either.

> > And, if a router relying on the reception of routing updates does
> > not get them or can't use them for lack of reachability to the advertiser,
> > someone will scream rather sooner than later. 
>
> I'd like to do better than waiting for someone to scream.  We had an incident
> here where an Ethernet board went dead in one direction in a machine
> running mrouted, which caused a multicast packet loop that was very nasty
> and very hard to diagnose.  I would have been much happier having my
> router scream at me (via its logging mechanism) and eliminate the loop,
> than having the users screaming at me.
>
Sounds reasonable.

> Steve
> 
Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Aug 11 12:56:54 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05995>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:57:57 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA05989>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:57:54 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17335>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 09:57:53 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id NAA08085; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 13:00:51 -0400
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Received: from dhaskin.baynetworks.com (eng_ppp28) by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA19462; Sun, 11 Aug 96 12:57:48 EDT
Message-Id: <9608111657.AA19462@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <dhaskin@pobox>
To: Kazuhiko Yamamoto  <kazu@is.aist-nara.ac.jp>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:56:54 +0000
Subject: Re: RIPng
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Priority: normal
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 
Kazu,

Please ignore my reply to Atsushi mail. I just misunderstood the 
problem of the BSD API.  Thanks for detail explanation.

Dimitry
 
> 
> > > If RIPng doesn't use link-local addresses as the source address,
> > > routed can determine the interface where RIPng comes by checking its
> > > source address with address of interface.
> > >
> > The source address IS the address of the interface where RIPng comes from.
> 
> I don't understand this. If a source address is link-local, the
> address isn't unique over multiple links.  So, we can't figure out the
> interface where the packet comes from by checking only the source
> address.
> If routed opens one socket per one neighbor, we can figure out an
> input interface:
> 
> 	(1) BSD implementation saves a pointer to the input interface
> 	   in mbuf(i.e. the received packet).
> 	(2) Find a PCB where not only group addresses match but also
> 	   a pointer in PCB and the pointer in the packet match.
> 	   (Of course, we need to modify the PCB data structure.)
> 	(3) Pass the packet to routed via the PCB. The socket tells
> 	   routed the neighbor which sent the packet.
> 
> Unfortunately, some routing daemon don't take this way. That is, just
> open one unbinded-and-unconnected socket for all neighbors then use
> sendto() function. So, Atushi said that we need a new API.
> 
> This problem can be generalized to "an address scope problem" which
> the Internet has not experienced. We WIDE project had two meetings to
> discuss this problem but we have not achieved even rough consensus
> yet. 
> 
> It is felt that there are many models for address scope and each has
> both advantages and disadvantages. I'm now hesitating to submit an ID
> about this problem which I wrote weeks ago. WIDE project is planning
> to have one more meeting on this problem around 8/23.
> 
> --Kazu
> 
> 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Aug 11 23:37:54 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07040>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:38:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07034>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:38:20 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20784>; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 12:38:11 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id VAA06510; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:37:58 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA04475; Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:37:57 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199608111937.VAA04475@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: Masaki Hirabaru <masaki@merit.edu>
Cc: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin), onoe@sm.sony.co.jp,
        6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 09 Aug 1996 12:22:53 EDT.
             <199608091622.MAA09422@merit.edu> 
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 1996 21:37:54 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   On inria ipv6, they intend to use ND. Its method I saw in its
   ping6 code is to try connect() and then getsockname() in order to
   know the local interface where the sender host is on.
   
=> it is not exactly the idea. The ICMPv6 user interface
doesn't compute the checksum for you then you need to know
the source address. You can provide one or simulate the
source address selection, ie do a connect() then a getsockname()
(of course the source address is printed out ASAP for obvious
routing debug purposes :-). The source address selection is
a real issue, BSD OSs give a good control over it but it is
very easy to get a bad address (link-local address for a foreign
destination for instance :-).

Regards

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

PS: Alain Durand has tried some ways to put a RFC1897 address
on a (configured) tunnel, there will be a note about this
in the next release (in some weeks).

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug 12 10:23:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17463>; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 01:32:55 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17457>; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 01:32:50 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08819>; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 01:32:48 -0700
Received: from shand.reo.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id EAA00174; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 04:23:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost by shand.reo.dec.com (5.65/MS-010395)
	id AA12045; Mon, 12 Aug 1996 09:23:24 +0100
Message-Id: <9608120823.AA12045@shand.reo.dec.com>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Cc: shand@shand.reo.dec.com, deering@parc.xerox.com
Subject: Re: RIPng 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 09 Aug 96 14:06:10 PDT."
             <96Aug9.140611pdt."75270"@digit.parc.xerox.com> 
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 96 09:23:24 +0100
From: (Mike Shand REO2 G/C2 DTN:830-4424) <shand@shand.reo.dec.com>
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Steve,

> But for the case of unicast routing (like RIPng), I think you're right --
> doing NUD on the forwarded traffic would suffice.  In which case, it becomes
> a question of whether or not it still might be better to use some other
> approach -- I have always thought that routing protocols either do or ought
> to do their own neighbor reachability verification, and that the need for
> NUD in IPv6 was to handle the case where one or both of the neighbors is
> a host.  I should probably flush that particular mindset.  

I must confess that I too have that mindset. 

> 	- fewer packets than NUD on a busy link: N Hellos per interval,
> 	  instead of up to 2N(N-1) ND packets per interval; note that,
> 	  as in the router->host case, router->router NUD cannot take
> 	  advantage of upper-layer info to suppress the NUD pings.
>

This seems like a big win to me. Maybe not for RIP which traditionally
is slow to reconfigure, but certainly for OSPF and (dare I say it) integrated
IS-IS which tend to be used in situations where very rapid response to
router failure is required. If the interval is of the order of a second
the extra load from the full mesh conectivity checks becomes significant.
However, even for RIP is seems to me that the efficency gain is worthwhile.
Of course this is not particularly relevant to the tunnel case which first
prompted this discussion.
 
> 	- can detect failure of a neighbor *before* sending any packets
> 	  to it, and therefore need not drop or delay any data packets
> 	  while waiting for NUD to time out.

Presumably since the RIP packets are multicast you don't trigger NUD on the
sending of the RIP packets themselves rather than the data. Would that also
be true over a pt-pt link (e.g. tunnel)? 

> The disadvantage of my proposal is that it is an additional mechanism that
> is not strictly necessary.

Yes, but it doesn't rely on a somewhat tenuous connection between
the operation of the routing protocol and the forwarding process.

On the other hand you could argue that such a connection is exactly what you
do want. Examples abound of problems arising where the connectivity
indicated by the routing protocol neighbor detection is different from that
actually existing for the data itself. This is presumably one reason for
the (to my mind) somewhat incestuous relationship of IP routing protocols
running over IP. Of course that doesn't completely remove the problem, but
it goes some way to reduce its likelyhood. 

On balance I would feel more comfortable with an explicit mechanism along the
lines of Steve's proposal. OSPF or course already has such a mechanism.

	Mike

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 14 00:59:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08615>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 08:08:18 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08609>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 08:08:17 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04894>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 08:08:16 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 14 Aug 1996 07:59:07 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007802ae37974fb132@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 07:59:02 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone logical drawing
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone Folk,

I've drawn a simple overview of the 6bone, derived from the info on the
WIDE 6bone drawing (thanks to Munechika Sumikawa and Kazu Yamamoto), but
hiding the WIDE inner detail.

Please let me know of errors and/or suggested format changes...and
especially incorrect network interconnect details. Also I'll need to know
when new stuff is added in (Geert Jan or ...??)

Clearly this picture form will rapidly become outdated, but I'll try to
adapt it as the 6bone grows.  It seems important (to me anyway) to be able
to be able to pictorially describe the 6bone to the curious.

So...hopefully this is useful...but let me know if it isn't.

It is pointed to on the 6bone home page:

	http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone-drawing.GIF


Also, I've finally put the Montreal 6bone bof minutes on the 6bone pages as
well.  Sorry it's taken so long, but for US Govt. funded folk, summers
ain't fun with budgets and personnel issues :-( .


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 14 02:23:19 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12607>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:23:27 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12599>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:23:26 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17950>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:23:25 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:23:24 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007806ae37ad90ed29@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:23:19 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: first mods to 6bone diagram
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Courtesy of some updates from Alain, a new 6bone picture is now installed
to show JOIN/DE and G6/FR connectivity.

As before, corrections/updates appreciated!


Thanks,

Bob

---------
=46rom: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 17:54:26 +0200
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone logical drawing

It is really nice to have this map!
here a first update for the G6:

I have now tunnels to:
- UNI-C (dk)  5f07:2b00:82e1:e700::/64
- WIDE (jp)   5f09:c400::/32
- ULISPON (pt) 5f0c:b300:c043:4c00::/64
- JOIN (de) 5f04:fb00::/32
- UNH-BAY-DEC (us) 5f02:3000::/32 && 5f0d:e900:ce98:a300::/64

I will shortly add a tunnel to RIPE and maybe some others to the US

Yours,

	- Alain.



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 14 03:13:07 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15838>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:13:10 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15832>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:13:08 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21241>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:13:08 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id KAA20419 for 6bone@isi.edu; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:13:07 -0700
Message-Id: <199608141713.KAA20419@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 10:13:07 PDT
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: 6bone map
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

As I've already noted to Bob Fink, the tunnels between cisco/Sun and
cisco/MERIT aren't noted on his current drawing.  Those have been up
and running for a while now.


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 14 06:46:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28696>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:46:57 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28690>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:46:55 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03114>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:46:54 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:46:54 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300781aae37eb5e75c2@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199608141713.KAA20419@puli.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 13:46:49 -0700
To: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone map
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

At 10:13 AM -0700 8/14/96, Ran Atkinson wrote:
>As I've already noted to Bob Fink, the tunnels between cisco/Sun and
>cisco/MERIT aren't noted on his current drawing.  Those have been up
>and running for a while now.

I've added Sun and MERIT, but need the ASN nos. they are using.

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 14 09:26:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08494>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:26:30 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08487>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:26:27 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13050>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:26:27 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:26:27 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007830ae3809ad9675@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 16:26:22 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Yet Anoter Picture (YAP)  ...and a few comments
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone Folk,

I have added and corrected from various data and a newer diagram is on the
web.  I've decided to number them in the title block, this one being
version 5.

I realize that several of the tunnels may not be up yet, but decided to err
on the side of too much info rather too little :-)


A few comments come to mind from various things mentioned to me during this
process:

1.  many seem to like having this diagram, but a valid point has been made
that the prefix numbers may be less than useful.  You really need more than
that from some registry anyhow (the point of the next comment).  I propose
dropping the prefix numbers.

2.  given the difficulty in culling this info accurately, I would propose
that in the future I add only tunnels that have been registered with the
6bone registry run by RIPE-NCC/Geert Jan.

3.  given the current randomness of tunnels, we may find RIPng beginning to
have difficulty converging - maybe not yet, but keep up this pace of
everyone randomly connecting and we probably will have problems.  I propose
we have a bit of dicussion about at least controlling the topology of the
nets/tunnels that we RIP over.  This area is not my specialty to say the
least, but it does look like  a problem ahead of us to me.


Please send comments on all this to the list.  Note my goal here is to make
6bone deployment work the best way...if you want to change something,
please comment on it...others have.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug 16 01:22:52 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00525>; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:23:00 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA00519>; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:22:57 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09777>; Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:22:56 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:22:54 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007808ae3a42433a93@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 08:22:52 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: email archive pointer added to 6bone web pages
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I've added a pointer to the 6bone email archive on the 6bone mail list web
page (courtesy of Mike Carlton at ISI).


Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug 19 11:23:23 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28148>; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:30:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28131>; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:30:12 -0700
Received: from mail11.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA00347>; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 12:30:10 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail11.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id PAA00919; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 15:23:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA08938; Mon, 19 Aug 1996 15:23:24 -0400
Message-Id: <9608191923.AA08938@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: 6bone logical drawing 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 14 Aug 96 07:59:02 PDT."
             <v03007802ae37974fb132@[128.3.9.22]> 
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 96 15:23:23 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

Thanks for doing this its very helpful.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 22 23:57:43 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22729>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:58:06 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22723>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:58:03 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA21893>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:57:59 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:57:48 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007803ae4367042c57@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 06:57:43 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: new 6bone diagram (version 7)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I've put up version 7 (Aug 23) of the 6bone diagram.  Shows new link from:

	Cisco/US to NETLAG/US

Also have corrected Craig Metz' site name to Inner as I had put it on the
map incorrectly before (sorry Craig).

Have removed prefixes as almost no comments were received about my removing
them, and I'm getting tighter on space.  I think Craig Metz is correct when
he says this picture should be for link/site overview viewing and not for
data that's best kept elsewhere.

Am only showing sites that I've been told are really up.  Sites/links that
may be up, but I've not been told are:

	HP/US to Cisco/US
	ISI-W/US to Cisco/US
	INRIA/FR to G6/FR
	ULisboa/PT to RIPE/NL

As I've said before, showing all sites connected to the 6bone may be best
for now, as we are just getting this going, but eventually the routing
backbone may be all that should be (can be) shown.


As always, comments to me or the list!


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug 23 08:17:56 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28806>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 09:25:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28800>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 09:25:15 -0700
Received: from mail11.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28545>; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 09:25:06 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail11.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id MAA02628; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 12:17:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA02453; Fri, 23 Aug 1996 12:17:57 -0400
Message-Id: <9608231617.AA02453@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer), bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: Re: new 6bone diagram (version 7) 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 23 Aug 96 06:57:43 PDT."
             <v03007803ae4367042c57@[128.3.9.22]> 
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 96 12:17:56 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

Be good to get a list of what routers (hardware numbers etc.) are
running on the 6bone too.

In a FAQ sheet not necessarilty on the drawing.  


thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Aug 26 09:58:58 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01463>; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:59:17 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01451>; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:59:08 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04404>; Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:59:06 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:59:03 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007805ae47e8968cd7@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199608262039.NAA03970@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 16:58:58 -0700
To: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: request for a 6bone feed
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kevin,

At 1:39 PM -0700 8/26/96, Kevin M. Lahey wrote:
>Thanks for all of your hard work on the 6bone diagram -- it certainly
>is helpful to see how things are proceeding!  I've noticed that
>quite alot of sites seem to be appearing without any requests
>showing up on the 6bone list -- I presume that there is some out of
>band signalling going on, and I'd like to be a part of it.  :-)
>I apologize for bothering you with this, but I presumed that
>if you were documenting this growth, you must have some idea
>of how it is proceeding...

Yes, there does seem to be some out of band signalling going on...but I'm
not involved in it either.  So far I've just been told after something is
hooked up, and I add it to the diagram.

My hope is that we can come up with a process that is more reasonable for
planning new connections, especially in the backbone/core of the 6bone.

Right now I think we are in learning mode and will evolve to a process that
works in the most practical way.


>I presume that I just need to request a connection from the
>closest site, which looks to be Cisco at about 10 hops and 15ms.
>Could you give me the name of the contact at Cisco (or a contact
>at some other likely site)?

Talk to Ran Atkinson at cisco (rja@cisco.com).


>Once we get a connection, we are certainly willing to provide
>further connections to others, if our upstream site doesn't mind.
>The NAS is maybe four FDDI hops from FIX-West, so it would seem that
>we have reasonable connectivity.

Makes sense.  Again we do need some process for discussing these things.
=46or now this list will have to do.


Thanks for bringing this up.

Bob




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 28 00:08:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01904>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:08:42 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01898>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:08:40 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03187>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:08:39 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:08:37 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007806ae4a02d40db8@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 07:08:32 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: NASA-Ames now added to 6bone
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 8 (28 Aug 96) adds NASA-Ames (the NAS facility) to
the 6bone stubbed from Cisco.


Bob



http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Aug 28 01:57:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07280>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 09:09:58 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07267>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 09:09:55 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19739>; Wed, 28 Aug 1996 09:09:55 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:57:16 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300780fae4a1c651047@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 08:57:09 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Gutenberg Univ. now added to 6bone
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 9 (28 Aug 96) adds Gutenberg Univ. (in Mainz,
Germany) to the 6bone stubbed from G6/FR.


Bob



http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/



=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=46rom: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 16:48:29 +0200
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: new tunnel

Hi bob.

I have a new tunnel between G6 and Johannes Gutenberg Universitaet, Mainz,
Germany. (5f0b:2900::/32 ipv4: 134.93.8.107)

Yours,

	- Alain.



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 29 02:50:31 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08644>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:39 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08637>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:38 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA09504>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:37 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:36 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300780aae4b7a4a52e2@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 09:50:31 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: SICS/SE now added to 6bone
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 10 (29 Aug 96) adds the Swedish Institute of Computer
Science (SICS) (in Kista, Sweden) to the 6bone stubbed from UNI-C/DK.


Bob



http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/



=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>, peter@sics.se
Subject: SICS on the 6bone
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:06:10 +0200
=46rom: Peter Sjodin <peter@sics.se>

Hi Bob,

SICS is now connected to the 6bone via a tunnel to UNI-C:

prefix:		5f0b:1700::/32
tunnel:		193.10.66.50 (HP 725)
ping:		sauce.ipv6.sics.se (5f0b:1700:c10a:4200:0:800:978:196d)
		tott.ipv6.sics.se (5f0b:1700:c10a:4200:0:800:94e:984b)

Peter

--
Peter Sj=F6din
Swedish Institute of Computer Science, PO Box 1263, S-164 28 KISTA, SWEDEN
Mail: peter@sics.se        Tel: +46 8 752 15 50       Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
-



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 29 22:50:19 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14819>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:50:33 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14812>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:50:31 -0700
Received: from ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16122>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 11:50:26 -0700
Received: from sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.1] by ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.6.10/tubsibr) with ESMTP id UAA19521; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:50:20 +0200
Received: from strauss@localhost by sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.6.10/tubsibr) id UAA15530; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:50:19 +0200
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 20:50:19 +0200
Message-Id: <199608291850.UAA15530@sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
From: Frank Strauss <strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Subject: 6bone maps
Reply-To: strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi!

What do you think about using a more sophisticated tool for drawing
these 6bone maps. One tool I think of (why ever ;-) is tkined
(http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/ibr/projects/nm/tkined/welcome.html). It may
be used to draw maps with some more information than just the
interconnection of IPv6 islands, e.g. those islands may get expanded,
to get more information on their internal structures and addresses.
Of course, simple postscript maps may be extracted.

One major problem would be, to keep the information up to date. ;-/

To get an impression (not more), you might take a look at a few
links at the bottom of http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/~strauss/ipng/.

							Frank

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug 30 00:21:21 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19077>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 13:21:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19070>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 13:21:34 -0700
Received: from imag.imag.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20678>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 13:21:33 -0700
Received: from rama.imag.fr (rama.imag.fr [192.44.68.9]) by imag.imag.fr (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id WAA22681 for <6bone@ISI.EDU>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 22:21:13 +0200
Received: (from durand@localhost) by rama.imag.fr (8.6.10/8.6.9) id WAA04494 for 6bone@ISI.EDU; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 22:21:22 +0200
From: "Alain Durand" <Alain.Durand@imag.fr>
Message-Id: <960829222122.ZM4485@rama.imag.fr>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 22:21:21 +0200
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.514 14may96)
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: G6/IMAG web server
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi all,

I'm pleased to announce our web server http://www.ipv6.imag.fr
It can be reach with regular IPv4 or IPv6 for folks on the 6-bone
with a tunnel to G6.

Let me know if you have any problem to read those pages.

	- Alain.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 29 14:52:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27925>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:13:41 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27919>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:13:39 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01671>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 16:13:34 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id SAA17372; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:52:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA03900; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 18:52:49 -0400
Message-Id: <9608292252.AA03900@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: ipv6imp@munnari.oz.au, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Atlanta Networld/Interop and IPv6 Connectivity
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 96 18:52:49 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Anyone going to show IPv6 at Interop in Atlanta Sept 18-20.  If so let me know 
we can coordinate some interop tests if you like.  Also we should try to show
access to the 6bone from the show floor too.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 29 10:29:42 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02434>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:30:00 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02422>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:54 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05468>; Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:54 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:50 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300781bae4bdecdf7e6@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199608291850.UAA15530@sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:42 -0700
To: strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone maps
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

=46rank,

>What do you think about using a more sophisticated tool for drawing
>these 6bone maps. One tool I think of (why ever ;-) is tkined
>(http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/ibr/projects/nm/tkined/welcome.html). It may
>be used to draw maps with some more information than just the
>interconnection of IPv6 islands, e.g. those islands may get expanded,
>to get more information on their internal structures and addresses.
>Of course, simple postscript maps may be extracted.
>
>One major problem would be, to keep the information up to date. ;-/
>
>To get an impression (not more), you might take a look at a few
>links at the bottom of http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/~strauss/ipng/.

Thanks for bringing this up. I really believe that, in the long run, it
would be best to auto generate the maps.  As you point out, we would need
to have an up to date registry, which hopefully is what Geert Jan's efforts
are all about.

=46or me, unfortunately, this form of drawing is not directly viewable on my
Mac as I could not find a tkined viewer.  Also, I still must print .ps
files to look at them.  Unix users may not have these problems of course.
Can it be taught to generate .gif files?  I'm pretty clueless about tkined
:-(

I say we do both manual and auto maps for awhile, till it is clear that the
registry gives sufficient data for the map to be up-to-date, and that we
like the auto gen'd result.

Would you be willing to set up a process (code!) to generate a map from
Geert Jan's registry?  It would probably have the effect of forcing people
to register :-)



Thanks again,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug 30 15:09:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17139>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 04:09:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17133>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 04:09:10 -0700
Received: from ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14070>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 04:09:04 -0700
Received: from sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de [134.169.34.1] by ra.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.6.10/tubsibr) with ESMTP id NAA14287; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:09:01 +0200
Received: from strauss@localhost by sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.6.10/tubsibr) id NAA22424; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:09:00 +0200
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:09:00 +0200
Message-Id: <199608301109.NAA22424@sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
From: Frank Strauss <strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
To: RLFink@lbl.gov
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
In-Reply-To: <v0300781bae4bdecdf7e6@[128.3.9.22]> (message from Bob Fink LBNL
	on Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:42 -0700)
Subject: Re: 6bone maps
Reply-To: strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi!

>> What do you think about using a more sophisticated tool for drawing
>> these 6bone maps. One tool I think of (why ever ;-) is tkined
>> (http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/ibr/projects/nm/tkined/welcome.html). It may
>> be used to draw maps with some more information than just the
>> interconnection of IPv6 islands, e.g. those islands may get expanded,
>> to get more information on their internal structures and addresses.
>> Of course, simple postscript maps may be extracted.
>> 
>> One major problem would be, to keep the information up to date. ;-/
>> 
>> To get an impression (not more), you might take a look at a few
>> links at the bottom of http://www.cs.tu-bs.de/~strauss/ipng/.


Bob> Thanks for bringing this up. I really believe that, in the long
Bob> run, it would be best to auto generate the maps.  As you point
Bob> out, we would need to have an up to date registry, which
Bob> hopefully is what Geert Jan's efforts are all about.

Hm. I think this is worth a separate thesis. ;-) (extraction of
locations from DNS, managing databases of addresses, arranging `good
looking' graphs, ...)


Bob> =46or me, unfortunately, this form of drawing is not directly
Bob> viewable on my Mac as I could not find a tkined viewer.  Also, I
Bob> still must print .ps files to look at them.  Unix users may not
Bob> have these problems of course.  Can it be taught to generate .gif
Bob> files?  I'm pretty clueless about tkined :-(

I converted those two maps to gif and put links on my page. BTW,
probably, tkined may compile cleanly on your Mac. Juergen? ;-)


Bob> I say we do both manual and auto maps for awhile, till it is
Bob> clear that the registry gives sufficient data for the map to be
Bob> up-to-date, and that we like the auto gen'd result.

Real automated map generation is quite difficult, I think. It would
take much time to define all needed attributes and write some code.
Once, reaching the point of acceptable operation, the 6bone might be
that large, that it doesn't fit on one page. ;-)


Bob> Would you be willing to set up a process (code!) to generate a
Bob> map from Geert Jan's registry?  It would probably have the effect
Bob> of forcing people to register :-)

Nice aspect. ;-) But I don't want to put much work on arranging those
maps. For me, using tkined is just a very nice way to combine the
creation of map overviews and some kind of network management.

Probably we could put another field into the registry records, that
contains a tkined map URL. Such a map may contain pointers to
neighboring tkined maps. This would be a good way to decentralize the
map management, although it doesn't give an overview at once.

							Frank

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Aug 29 23:51:13 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19897>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:51:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19891>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:51:19 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA18465>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:51:18 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:51:17 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007802ae4ca1e8d15d@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <960830111741.ZM5154@rama.imag.fr>
References: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>        "Re: 6bone maps" (Aug
 29,  5:29pm) <v0300781bae4bdecdf7e6@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 06:51:13 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: new tunnel
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 11 (30 Aug 96) adds tunnel from SICS/SE to G6/FR.


Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
At 2:17 AM -0700 8/30/96, Alain Durand wrote:
>Hi bob,
>
>There is a new tunnel to connect SICS and G6.
>
>	- Alain.




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Aug 30 03:57:43 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28068>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:58:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28062>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:57:56 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06754>; Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:57:52 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:57:49 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300780eae4cd906c749@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199608301109.NAA22424@sol.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
References: <v0300781bae4bdecdf7e6@[128.3.9.22]> (message from Bob Fink
 LBNL	on Thu, 29 Aug 1996 17:29:42 -0700)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 10:57:43 -0700
To: strauss@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone maps
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

=46rank,

>Real automated map generation is quite difficult, I think. It would
>take much time to define all needed attributes and write some code.
>Once, reaching the point of acceptable operation, the 6bone might be
>that large, that it doesn't fit on one page. ;-)

Thanks for your response, though I don't understand how much your approach
does to shorten the time involved drawing maps as almost any manual time
spent per new link is no faster than what I do now.   At least for the
simple hi-level stick map I do at present.


>Probably we could put another field into the registry records, that
>contains a tkined map URL. Such a map may contain pointers to
>neighboring tkined maps. This would be a good way to decentralize the
>map management, although it doesn't give an overview at once.

Sure, this might be a good way to do things.  Geert Jan?


Did someone solve this proble for the mbone?



I think I will keep generating a manual map for a while longer.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Sep  1 00:51:22 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13617>; Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:29 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13611>; Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:26 -0700
Received: from kalae.kohala.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA26990>; Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:24 -0700
Received: from kohala.kohala.com (kohala.kohala.com [206.62.226.33]) by kalae.kohala.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA05730 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:24 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kohala.kohala.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id HAA01761; Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:23 -0700
Message-Id: <199609011451.HAA01761@kohala.kohala.com>
From: rstevens@kohala.com (W. Richard Stevens)
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 07:51:22 -0700
Reply-To: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>
X-Phone: +1 520 297 9416
X-Homepage: http://www.noao.edu/~rstevens
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: 6bone connection requested
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I'd like to join the 6bone.  After following this mailing list for
the past few weeks, and looking at the home page, it's not obvious
how this happens.  My guess is to just find someone "close" that is
already connected, who is willing to provide a tunnel?

I've got the current map, have done some pings and traceroutes, and
it appears "Sun/US" is the "closest".  I'm in Tucson and my network
connectivity goes through either SprintLink is Anaheim or MCI in Los
Angeles.  (It's hard to tell from the names on the map, just where
the site is located, physically and network-wise.)  I am assuming
that's its best to connect to one of the leaves (like Sun), and not
the interior nodes (like Cisco).

	Rich Stevens

(I apologize is this is a duplicate.  I sent the same request out
yesterday, but it was from an email account other than my 6bone
subscription, so it appears to have been tossed, although majordomo
did not return an error of any form.)

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep  2 05:07:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11681>; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 12:08:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11675>; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 12:08:33 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA07899>; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 12:08:33 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id MAA12079; Mon, 2 Sep 1996 12:07:59 -0700
Message-Id: <199609021907.MAA12079@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 1996 12:07:59 PDT
In-Reply-To: rstevens@kohala.com (W. Richard Stevens)
       "6bone connection requested" (Sep  1,  7:51am)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: 6bone connection requested
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Rich,

  cisco is basically willing to provide a tunnel to anyone that
is topologically nearby.  If you want a tunnel with cisco, 
send me private email with the particulars.  If you prefer to
setup a tunnel with Sun or some other node, that's also fine
with us.

Ran
rja@cisco.com


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 00:52:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01407>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 07:52:13 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA01401>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 07:52:12 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA10201>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 07:52:11 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 3 Sep 1996 07:52:09 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007802ae51f5e25dc2@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199608302221.PAA05287@strat.iol.unh.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 07:52:04 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone map - tunnel from UNH/US to UNI-C/DK
Cc: Sebastien.Roy@unh.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 12 (3 Sep 96) adds tunnel from UNH/US to UNI-C/DK.


Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
At 3:21 PM -0700 8/30/96, Sebastien.Roy@unh.edu wrote:
>Hello,
>
>	My name is Sebastien Roy, and I am from the InterOperability
>Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire.  I know how much you
>must love updating the 6bone map that you have so generously made
>available to us.  There is a tunnel that is not reflected in the map
>however.  It connects UNH and UNI-C.  Thanks.  By the way, the map is
>very useful!
>
>--
>Sebastien C. Roy
>RCC/IOL
>University of New Hampshire
>Sebastien.Roy@unh.edu




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 19:53:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04061>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 08:54:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA04038>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 08:54:09 -0700
Received: from bianca.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA12766>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 08:53:58 -0700
Received: (from weiss@localhost) by bianca.ZDV.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.7.3/8.6.12) id RAA03791; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:53:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:53:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609031553.RAA03791@bianca.ZDV.Uni-Mainz.DE>
From: Juergen Weiss <weiss@uni-mainz.de>
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: IPv6 www Server on tick.ipv6.Uni-Mainz.DE
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Hi all,

to make our site more interesting I have installed a www server
on tick.ipv6.Uni-Mainz.DE.  This is an ipv6 only www server. It
provides the same pages as the regular www server
www.Uni-Mainz.DE (ipv4 only).

But beware: No ipv6 specific information. Most pages are in
German. Nevertheless better than icmp responses elicted by ping.

The server is a quick port of apache 1.1.1 to ipv6 running
on a Netbsd PC with the INRIA ipv6 code.


Juergen Weiss

-- 
Juergen Weiss		| Universitaet Mainz, Zentrum f"ur Datenverarbeitung,
weiss@uni-mainz.de      | 55099 Mainz, Tel: 06131/39-6361, FAX: 06131/39-6407

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 08:38:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15478>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:40:58 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15453>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:40:54 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24982>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:40:52 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 2524"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I91LH4QTO40027C2@FNAL.FNAL.GOV> for
 6bone@isi.edu; Tue, 03 Sep 1996 13:40:50 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id NAA18874; Tue, 03 Sep 1996 13:38:53 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 13:38:53 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: FNAL on 6bone
To: 6bone Mailer <6bone@isi.edu>
Message-Id: <199609031838.NAA18874@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Fermilab came up on a 6bone tunnel to ESNET as of August 31.  We're
routing 5f01:2500:83e1::/48 by the tunnel to ::131.225.57.207.  I'm
adding internal tunnels to our major workgroups so that by tomorrow
IPv6 routing should be available to more than 80% of the site.

Other DOE national labs are invited to request tunnels to FNAL (with
ESNET coordination), as are universities directly connected to the
Chicago NAP.
				Matt Crawford


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 04:15:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13673>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:16:04 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13667>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:16:02 -0700
Received: from kalae.kohala.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23475>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:16:01 -0700
Received: from kohala.kohala.com (kohala.kohala.com [206.62.226.33]) by kalae.kohala.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA09829 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:16:00 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kohala.kohala.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id LAA10378; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:15:59 -0700
Message-Id: <199609031815.LAA10378@kohala.kohala.com>
From: rstevens@kohala.com (W. Richard Stevens)
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 11:15:59 -0700
Reply-To: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>
X-Phone: +1 520 297 9416
X-Homepage: http://www.noao.edu/~rstevens
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: secondary name server that understands AAAA records
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Before adding AAAA records to my name server I started wondering
just what my secondary was going to do when it got AAAA records
in the zone transfers.  As Mark Andrews pointed out to me, even
if the secondary's server ignores them gracefully (which it isn't
ovbious older versions of bind do) one's secondary server had
better understand AAAA records too, since all servers are
considered equal.

Currently my ISP is providing my secondary, but they're not at
bind-4.9.4 so I'd better find a new secondary.  Is anyone willing
to provide a secondary--I'm willing to reciprocate for anyone else
needing an IPv6-knowledgable secondary.

BTW, shouldn't this be added to some of the transition documentation
somewhere--the fact that not only must one's name server be AAAA
knowledgable, but also one's secondary server(s)?  It could take many
years for some vendors to ship a version of bind that understands
AAAA records.

	Rich Stevens

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 09:48:21 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19271>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 12:50:30 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19214>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 12:50:22 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28285>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 12:50:21 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 2553"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I91NWA0C1G0027C2@FNAL.FNAL.GOV> for
 6bone@isi.edu; Tue, 03 Sep 1996 14:50:19 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id OAA19207; Tue, 03 Sep 1996 14:48:22 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 14:48:21 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: secondary name server that understands AAAA records
In-Reply-To: "03 Sep 1996 11:15:59 PDT."
 <"199609031815.LAA10378"@kohala.kohala.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Message-Id: <199609031948.OAA19207@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> Before adding AAAA records to my name server I started wondering
> just what my secondary was going to do when it got AAAA records
> in the zone transfers.

After a couple of years without a peek in the BIND source code, I
was shocked and dismayed last week to see that named-xfer uses a
text-based intermediate file.  This means that even though a
non-authoritative server will correctly cache RRs it doesn't
understand, a secondary server won't get them.
_________________________________________________________
Matt Crawford          crawdad@fnal.gov          Fermilab
  PGP: D5 27 83 7A 25 25 7D FB  09 3C BA 33 71 C4 DA 6A

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 06:40:17 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22688>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:40:30 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22682>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:40:28 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01360>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:40:27 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:40:25 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007808ae5247365a41@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 1996 13:40:17 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone map - new tunnels for FNAL/US and KEK/JP from ESnet/US
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone map version 13 (3 Sep 96) adds tunnels from ESnet/US to FNAL/US and
from ESnet/US to KEK/JP.


Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>, routing@es.net
Subject: Re: IPv6 forwarding code in place
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 11:21:12 -0700
=46rom: "Rebecca L. Nitzan" <nitzan@es.net>

Bob:

  We also brought up a tunnel to KEK this weekend.

They are prefix  5F09:C900::/32

hosts:

ping6 5f09:c900:8257:3900:0:20:aff8:84fa
ping6 5f09:c900:8257:3900:0:800:2be4:4450

			-- Becca
=3D=3D
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 13:38:53 -0500
=46rom: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: FNAL on 6bone
To: 6bone Mailer <6bone@isi.edu>

=46ermilab came up on a 6bone tunnel to ESNET as of August 31.  We're
routing 5f01:2500:83e1::/48 by the tunnel to ::131.225.57.207.  I'm
adding internal tunnels to our major workgroups so that by tomorrow
IPv6 routing should be available to more than 80% of the site.

Other DOE national labs are invited to request tunnels to FNAL (with
ESNET coordination), as are universities directly connected to the
Chicago NAP.
				Matt Crawford

-



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 10:39:52 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06024>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:40:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06018>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:40:00 -0700
Received: from galaxy.nas.nasa.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14409>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:39:59 -0700
Received: from localhost (kml@localhost)
	by galaxy.nas.nasa.gov (8.6.12/NAS.6.1) with SMTP id RAA00685; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:39:53 -0700
Message-Id: <199609040039.RAA00685@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov>
X-Authentication-Warning: galaxy.nas.nasa.gov: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: secondary name server that understands AAAA records 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Sep 1996 11:15:59 PDT."
             <199609031815.LAA10378@kohala.kohala.com> 
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 17:39:52 -0700
From: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In message <199609031815.LAA10378@kohala.kohala.com>W. Richard Stevens writes
>Before adding AAAA records to my name server I started wondering
>just what my secondary was going to do when it got AAAA records
>in the zone transfers.

I just created a subdomain into which I put all of my AAAA records,
ipv6.nas.nasa.gov.  It looks like quite a few other sites are doing
something similar.  The documentation for the Inria code suggests that
it can be difficult to deal with hosts that have both IPv4 and IPv6
address mappings:

   FIRST use DNS option "mapIPv6" ("options mapIPv6" in /etc/resolv.conf
   or "setenv RES_OPTIONS mapIPv6").  If you forget this any IPv6/IPv4
   application will try to get AAAA RR before A RR and wait because there
   are no AAAA RR.  With it you cannot use a name bound to both an IPv4
   and an IPv6 address.

Or is there something else at work here?  I've noticed relatively
little discussion of this, or of reverse DNS issues.

Thanks,

Kevin

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 10:56:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06726>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:57:07 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06713>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:57:05 -0700
Received: from galaxy.nas.nasa.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16803>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:57:05 -0700
Received: from localhost (kml@localhost)
	by galaxy.nas.nasa.gov (8.6.12/NAS.6.1) with SMTP id RAA00774; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 17:57:00 -0700
Message-Id: <199609040057.RAA00774@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov>
X-Authentication-Warning: galaxy.nas.nasa.gov: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>
Cc: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: secondary name server that understands AAAA records 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Sep 1996 17:39:52 PDT."
             <199609040039.RAA00685@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov> 
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 17:56:59 -0700
From: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In message <199609040039.RAA00685@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov>"Kevin M. Lahey" writes
>I just created a subdomain into which I put all of my AAAA records,
>ipv6.nas.nasa.gov.  It looks like quite a few other sites are doing
>something similar.

Which isn't to suggest that a secondary is unnecessary, but that
you could chose a different secondary for the domain that contains
the AAAA records.  Sorry for the ambiguity.

I'd be happy to serve as secondary for anyone who needs it.

Thanks,
Kevin

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep  3 19:29:01 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11519>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 20:36:21 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11513>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 20:36:20 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29670>; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 20:36:19 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id XAA16989; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 23:29:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA06503; Tue, 3 Sep 1996 23:29:01 -0400
Message-Id: <9609040329.AA06503@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: secondary name server that understands AAAA records 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Sep 96 17:56:59 PDT."
             <199609040057.RAA00774@galaxy.nas.nasa.gov> 
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 96 23:29:01 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Kevin,

AAAA is just another RR type.  If BIND don't find AAAA record condition
is returned to resolver not found.  Then go look for A RR type.  I don't
see what the problem is or would be unless folks are trying to alter
BIND Server code?  Good luck.

As far as transition spec.  Secondaries are not required in DNS (though
useful).  Some of the transition spec was left to common sense.  If you
want a secondary that supports AAAA records and it don't do IPv6 that
just seems dumb.  I don't think we should have to specify this in that
spec. But clearly useful for documentation as we roll out our kits and
products as vendors.

/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep  4 15:25:33 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20253>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 04:25:43 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20247>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 04:25:40 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA16197>; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 04:25:38 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id NAA26108; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:25:36 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id NAA27778; Wed, 4 Sep 1996 13:25:34 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609041125.NAA27778@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: "Kevin M. Lahey" <kml@nas.nasa.gov>, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: secondary name server that understands AAAA records 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 03 Sep 1996 23:29:01 EDT.
             <9609040329.AA06503@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 1996 13:25:33 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   AAAA is just another RR type.  If BIND don't find AAAA record condition
   is returned to resolver not found.  Then go look for A RR type.  I don't
   see what the problem is or would be unless folks are trying to alter
   BIND Server code?  Good luck.
   
=> it is not so simple. You can look at the return code because
with NXDOMAIN it is not useful to go look for an A RR (or any RR).
Another problem is the order when you have a search list (and you
should have one, see below).

   As far as transition spec.  Secondaries are not required in DNS (though
   useful).  Some of the transition spec was left to common sense.  If you
   want a secondary that supports AAAA records and it don't do IPv6 that
   just seems dumb.  I don't think we should have to specify this in that
   spec. But clearly useful for documentation as we roll out our kits and
   products as vendors.
   
=> the common solution to this problem is to have a special zone
(for instance ipv6.<your domain name>) and to select secondaries
with AAAA support.
 Two remarks:
 - common BINDs are enough for the reverse zone (which uses only PTR RRs).
 - it is very easy to add AAAA support to an old BIND. The diffs are
 small and can be applied to any architecture. Especially you have *not*
 to run IPv6 in order to support AAAA RRs for a secondary.

Regards

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

l
to try to get an A record) or NOERROR (then there is likely an A RR).

   Or is there something else at work here?  I've noticed relatively
   little discussion of this, or of reverse DNS issues.
   
=> reverse DNS is much simpler, there is only an issue for IPv4-compatible
addresses...

Regards

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Sep  6 00:33:47 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16786>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 07:34:00 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16780>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 07:33:56 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA19986>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 07:33:55 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 6 Sep 1996 07:33:55 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007801ae55e57dbc7e@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 07:33:47 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: no 6bone map changes till the 16th Sep
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone folks,

Am on travel all of next week (9th thru the 13th of Sep), and won't be
dealing with email at all.  So if you have 6bone map config change info,
please note that I won't respond to it till the 16th of Sep.

Gee, a week without email...how novel :-)


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Sep  6 02:19:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23139>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:19:43 -0700
Received: from quark.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23133>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:19:40 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by quark.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12029>; Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:19:39 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:19:38 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007800ae55fef0ec4a@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 1996 09:19:32 -0700
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone map - new tunnel from Cisco/US to UOregon/US
Cc: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dave Meyer caught me before I left!

6bone map version 14 (6 Sep 96) adds tunnels from Cisco/US to UOregon/US.

Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: no 6bone map changes till the 16th Sep
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 08:33:09 -0700
=46rom: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>


Bob,

The University of Oregon has just brought up a tunnel to
Cisco. Have a good trip (vacation, I hope).

Thanks,

Dave
-



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Sep  7 07:43:35 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02700>; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:38 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02694>; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:37 -0700
Received: from rennsport.nas.nasa.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06867>; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:37 -0700
Received: (from ahoag@localhost)
	by rennsport.nas.nasa.gov (8.6.12/NAS.6.1) id OAA26133; Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:36 -0700
From: "Andrew J. Hoag" <ahoag@nas.nasa.gov>
Message-Id: <9609071443.ZM26132@rennsport.nas.nasa.gov>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:35 -0700
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.3 08feb96 MediaMail)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Geographically-based 3D map
Cc: ipv6-ops@nas.nasa.gov
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


There is now a geographically-based map available on the WWW. Using tools
borrowed from the Mbone visualization, we at NAS have come up with a VRML model
of the 6bone with all the tunnels that we could find represented. The URL for
the new map is:

http://www.nas.nasa.gov/NAS/Groups/netops/IPv6/viz/index.html

There are static GIFs available as well, for those without VRML browsers. I am
still missing IPv4 endpoints for U of Oregon and KEK/JP (I guessed on KEK). If
anyone can provide those to me I will add them to the map.

In the near future, we hope to publish a database of the available tunnels and
allow for everyone to update it themselves. This hopefully will provide the
most current repository for sites and contacts.

Any questions, corrections or feedback can be addressed to
<ahoag@nas.nasa.gov>.


-- 
| Andrew Hoag      | MS 258-6                | Voice: (415) 604-4972 |
| Network Engineer | Moffett Field, CA 94035 |   Fax: (415) 604-4377 |
| High-Speed LAN   +------------------------+---+--------------------+
| NAS Facility     | http://www.gac.edu/~ahoag/ | ahoag@nas.nasa.gov |
--

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep  9 13:23:32 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17715>; Sun, 8 Sep 1996 12:23:49 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17709>; Sun, 8 Sep 1996 12:23:47 -0700
Received: from nwgpc.kek.jp (snoopy.kek.jp) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05410>; Sun, 8 Sep 1996 12:23:46 -0700
Received: from localhost by nwgpc.kek.jp (8.7.5/X-95.11.12/nwgpc)
	id EAA01483; Mon, 9 Sep 1996 04:23:34 +0900 (JST)
To: ahoag@nas.nasa.gov
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, ipv6-ops@nas.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: Geographically-based 3D map
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 7 Sep 1996 14:43:35 -0700"
References: <9609071443.ZM26132@rennsport.nas.nasa.gov>
Message-Id: <19960909042332M/yamagata@nwgpc.kek.jp>
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 1996 04:23:32 +0900
From: yamagata@nwgpc.kek.jp
X-Dispatcher: impost version 0.91 (Jun 5,1996)
Lines: 11
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> http://www.nas.nasa.gov/NAS/Groups/netops/IPv6/viz/index.html

> There are static GIFs available as well, for those without VRML
> browsers. I am still missing IPv4 endpoints for U of Oregon and
> KEK/JP (I guessed on KEK). If anyone can provide those to me I will
> add them to the map.

Our KEK/JP endpoint machine is
130.87.57.37    5f09:c900:8257:3900:0:20:aff8:84fa

					yamagata

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 10:16:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02533>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 06:51:46 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02524>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 06:51:43 -0700
Received: from ayla.tbit.dk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17991>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 06:51:41 -0700
Received: from mdp.tbit.dk (mdp.tbit.dk [194.182.135.65]) by ayla.tbit.dk (8.6.11/8.6.11) with SMTP id PAA11306; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 15:52:03 +0200
Message-Id: <32375644.5193@tbit.dk>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:16:04 -0700
From: Martin Peck <mdp@tbit.dk>
Organization: Telebit Communications A/S
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Cc: mdp@tbit.dk
Subject: 6Bone Mail
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi All,

Telebit Communications has now set up IPv6 tunnels to UNI-C and the JOIN 
team in Munster, to participate in the testing of IDRPv6. An update to 
the 6Bone map should follow shortly.

Although the use of this routing protocol still requires configured 
tunnels to be established it does allow the propogation of routing 
information between domains. Its wider use in the 6Bone network could 
perhaps be discussed in parallel to the dialogue surrounding RIP.

Feedback Requested.

Martin Peck
URL: http://www.tbit.dk/

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 18:37:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03602>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:39:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03596>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:39:15 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA19811>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 07:39:13 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id QAA10917; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:37:51 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id QAA03759; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:37:50 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609111437.QAA03759@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: Martin Peck <mdp@tbit.dk>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:16:04 PDT.
             <32375644.5193@tbit.dk> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:37:48 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   Although the use of this routing protocol (*) still requires configured 
   tunnels to be established it does allow the propogation of routing 
   information between domains. Its wider use in the 6Bone network could 
   perhaps be discussed in parallel to the dialogue surrounding RIP.
   (*) = IDRPv6

=> there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
 - RIPv6 but RIPv6 doesn't scale (remember DVMRP) and is not specified
 for the usage over tunnels. Obviously RIPv6 is a cheap protocol
 for the routing inside an IPv6 cloud (OSPFv6 has the same problem
 and is not cheap or available).
 - IDRPv6 but it is not available on all the platforms, the draft
 is not finished, etc... : it is not yet ready. I believe it is
 the good long term solution then we should test it ASAP but
 it is not possible to deploy it before many months.
 - the last solution is to consider the Internet as a NBMA
 and to use NHRP. If you look at one of the maps of the 6 bone
 you can understand a tool is hardly needed and both the short-cut
 facility and a server tree (a level smaller and easier to manage)
 are good things.

 I don't believe we can get all this stuff running in a few days
then we have to do a choice (the same one :-) ASAP...

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

PS: perhaps we should create a 6bone IETF WG or to resume the TACIT WG
(one of the T of TACIT are for "tests" :-) ?

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 02:05:16 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07139>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:21 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA07133>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:19 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA23505>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:17 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id JAA08401 for 6bone@isi.edu; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:16 -0700
Message-Id: <199609111605.JAA08401@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:05:16 PDT
In-Reply-To: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
       "Re: 6Bone Mail" (Sep 11,  4:37pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone routing
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


6bone-router.cisco.com contains a full routing table.  It also has
a fairly large number of tunnels.  It is managed by me in free time
while waiting for builds and such like.  The current 6bone is easily
managed by humans using static routing.

There is no immediate need to move to any routing protocol.  Later
this year or early next year, when there is more of a need, then
it will begin to make sense to start using a routing protocol.

There has been agreement that RIP for IPv6 will be the routing protocol
initially used.  I agree with that decision.  It is not a permanent
answer but it will provide a good testing vehicle and meet the needs
for some while.

According to someone close to the IDRPv2 spec, that spec is not yet stable
so it is certainly premature to be considering deploying that at the
current time.  Down the road, yes, it should be considered.  However,
I do not view that as a sensible approach in the near-term.

Ran
rja@cisco.com


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 08:21:51 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08156>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:21:57 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08150>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:21:55 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24509>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:21:54 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id MAA07564; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:25:11 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA16941; Wed, 11 Sep 96 12:21:51 EDT
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 12:21:51 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9609111621.AA16941@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


> From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
> => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
>  - RIPv6 but RIPv6 doesn't scale (remember DVMRP) and is not specified
>  for the usage over tunnels.

How come? Why should RIPv6 work differently over tunnels?
As I see it, tunnel is just an instance of 'normal' point-to-point interface.
The fact that IPv6 packets are encapsulated into IPv4 frames at
link layer should not matter at network layer.  Do you tweak
your network protocols for each meadia it may run over?  I don't.
Here at Bay we have a generic RIPv6 implementation which runs over tunnels
as specified -- the same way it runs over other types of links.

>                              Obviously RIPv6 is a cheap protocol
>  for the routing inside an IPv6 cloud (OSPFv6 has the same problem
>  and is not cheap or available).
>  - IDRPv6 but it is not available on all the platforms, the draft
>  is not finished, etc... : it is not yet ready. I believe it is
>  the good long term solution then we should test it ASAP but
>  it is not possible to deploy it before many months.
>  - the last solution is to consider the Internet as a NBMA
>  and to use NHRP. If you look at one of the maps of the 6 bone
>  you can understand a tool is hardly needed and both the short-cut
>  facility and a server tree (a level smaller and easier to manage)
>  are good things.

NHRP is not a routing protocol.  Are you proposing to confine 6bone
to a single LIS so no routing would be necessary?

> 
>  I don't believe we can get all this stuff running in a few days
> then we have to do a choice (the same one :-) ASAP...
> 
> Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
> 
> PS: perhaps we should create a 6bone IETF WG or to resume the TACIT WG
> (one of the T of TACIT are for "tests" :-) ?
> 

Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 08:47:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09851>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:47:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09845>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:47:34 -0700
Received: from vnet.ibm.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25917>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 09:47:33 -0700
Message-Id: <199609111647.AA25917@venera.isi.edu>
Received: from RHQVM19 by VNET.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 8231;
   Wed, 11 Sep 96 12:47:35 EDT
X-Mailer: IPERNOTE 5.22
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 12:47:48 EDT
From: "Matthew R. Ganis (914) 684-4575" <ganis@VNET.IBM.COM>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: ipv6 addresses
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Who is allocating ipv6 addresses ??  We're starting to bring up
some ipv6 machines in our lab, get some experience, and then attempt
to connect to the 6-bone.  I'd like to get some officially assigned
addresses now
                             thanks,
                                Matt Ganis - ganis@vnet.ibm.com


***********************************************************************
"The best way to get praise    |        Return Address:
  is to die"                   | IBM VNET: GANIS at RHQVM19
              Italian Proverb  | Internet: ganis@vnet.ibm.com
                               | IPNET: ganis@bacchus.ims.advantis.com

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 03:15:55 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11916>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:19:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA11910>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:19:46 -0700
Received: from wayback.uoregon.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27702>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:19:45 -0700
Received: (from meyer@localhost) by wayback.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.1) id KAA13437; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199609111715.KAA13437@wayback.uoregon.edu>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: "Matthew R. Ganis (914) 684-4575" <ganis@VNET.IBM.COM>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: ipv6 addresses 
In-Reply-To: ganis@vnet.ibm.com's message of Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:47:48 -0400.
	     <199609111647.AA25917@venera.isi.edu> 
X-Uri: "http://ns.uoregon.edu/~meyer"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:15:55 -0700
From: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO



Matt,

My understanding is that everyone should be using RFC1897 (test) 
addressing.

Dave

-- 

--------------
David M. Meyer			    Voice:    +1 541.346.1747
Director			    Cellular: +1 541.954.1103
Advanced Network Technology Center  SkyPager: +1 888.691.7491
University Computing                FAX:      +1 541.346.4397
Computing Center                    Internet: meyer@ns.uoregon.edu
University of Oregon		    URL:      http://ns.uoregon.edu/~meyer
1225 Kincaid            
Eugene, OR 97403
PGP Fingerprint                     9A 79 2B 07 9A D1 81 45  1A 99 74 59 4F A0 
3E 43




From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 03:23:40 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12105>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:24:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12095>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:24:20 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA27989>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:24:18 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id KAA01887; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:23:40 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:23:40 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199609111723.KAA01887@stilton.cisco.com>
To: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
Cc: mdp@tbit.dk, 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <199609111437.QAA03759@givry.inria.fr> (message from Francis Dupont on Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:37:48 +0200)
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>> => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:

    I say there is four.

    - Use static routing. Build a backbone of nodes so most connected (tail)
      sites use prefix 0/0 to get to the backbone. Their tunnel endpoint
      routers are configured with a /64 for the site (and other sites they
      connect). The backbone routers pass around /32 (routes on AS numbers
      only). 

    This should hold us for a long time until the specs are stable.

Dino
   

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 03:44:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13649>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:44:46 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13637>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:44:37 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28983>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:44:33 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id KAA02937; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:44:02 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:44:02 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199609111744.KAA02937@stilton.cisco.com>
To: meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu
Cc: ganis@VNET.IBM.COM, 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <199609111715.KAA13437@wayback.uoregon.edu> (meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu)
Subject: Re: ipv6 addresses
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>> My understanding is that everyone should be using RFC1897 (test) 
>> addressing.

    That is, you can choose your own address but the high-order byte must
    be 0x5f and you must conform to the RFC 1897 format.

    Here is an example from 6bone-router.cisco.com. There is an ethernet and
    fddi ring running IPv6:

6bone-router>sh ipv route con
IPv6 Routing Table - 26 entries
Codes: C - Connected, L - Local, S - Static
Timers: Uptime/Expires

C 5F00:6D00:C01F:0700/80 [0/0]
  via 5F00:6D00:C01F:0700::0060:3E11:6772, Fddi0, 2d02h/never
C 5F00:6D00:C01F:0700:0001/80 [0/0]
  via 5F00:6D00:C01F:0700:0001:0060:3E11:6770, Ethernet0, 2d02h/never

    The next-hop (after via) is the router's IPv6 address on the respective
    interface. We use a /80 for those interfaces.

Dino

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 09:45:06 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13826>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:48:05 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13820>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:48:04 -0700
Received: from inner.net (avarice.inner.net) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29140>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:47:59 -0700
Received: from inner.net (lust.inner.net [199.33.248.1]) by inner.net (8.7.5/42) with ESMTP id RAA00860; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 17:45:07 GMT
Message-Id: <199609111745.RAA00860@inner.net>
To: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:23:40 PDT."
             <199609111723.KAA01887@stilton.cisco.com> 
X-Copyright: Copyright 1996, Craig Metz, All Rights Reserved.
X-Reposting-Policy: With explicit permission only
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:45:06 -0400
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In message <199609111723.KAA01887@stilton.cisco.com>, you write:
>>> => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
>
>    I say there is four.
>
>    - Use static routing. Build a backbone of nodes so most connected (tail)
>      sites use prefix 0/0 to get to the backbone. Their tunnel endpoint
>      routers are configured with a /64 for the site (and other sites they
>      connect). The backbone routers pass around /32 (routes on AS numbers
>      only). 
>
>    This should hold us for a long time until the specs are stable.

	This is exactly what is being done now, and it works just fine.

	I will make one critical correction, however: leaves should use a
"default" route of 5f00::0/8 to help prevent implementation bugs from causing
bogon (multicast, link-local, IPv4-compatible, etc.) addresses from going down
tunnels.

									-Craig


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 03:49:41 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14008>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:51:15 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14002>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:51:13 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29245>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:51:12 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id KAA03233; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:49:41 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:49:41 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199609111749.KAA03233@stilton.cisco.com>
To: cmetz@inner.net
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
In-Reply-To: <199609111745.RAA00860@inner.net> (message from Craig Metz on Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:45:06 -0400)
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>> 	I will make one critical correction, however: leaves should use a
>> "default" route of 5f00::0/8 to help prevent implementation bugs from causing
>> bogon (multicast, link-local, IPv4-compatible, etc.) addresses from going down
>> tunnels.

    Well for the reason you state, I would use 0/0 so we can find those bugs.

Dino

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 22:01:14 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14401>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:01:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14352>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:01:20 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA29729>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:01:18 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA13699; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:01:16 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA04456; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:01:15 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609111801.UAA04456@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:21:51 EDT.
             <9609111621.AA16941@pobox.BayNetworks.com> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:01:14 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   
   > From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
   > => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
   >  - RIPv6 but RIPv6 doesn't scale (remember DVMRP) and is not specified
   >  for the usage over tunnels.
   
   How come? Why should RIPv6 work differently over tunnels?

=> it is not clear if a tunnel is an interface (with what kind
of properties) and RIPv6 doesn't manage half connectivity.
DVMRP is a distance vector routing protocol with special hooks
for tunnel and is not the good solution for the Mbone.
I believe we should avoid the same error...

   As I see it, tunnel is just an instance of 'normal' point-to-point interface.

=> have tunnels link-local addresses (interface => link-local address
according to RFCs) ? Are tunnels point-to-point or NBMA ?
How the "multicast" is done on tunnels ? It is not so clear.

   The fact that IPv6 packets are encapsulated into IPv4 frames at
   link layer should not matter at network layer.  Do you tweak
   your network protocols for each meadia it may run over?  I don't.

=> RIPv6 is specified for LANs (in the mind of its authors).

   Here at Bay we have a generic RIPv6 implementation which runs over tunnels
   as specified -- the same way it runs over other types of links.
   
=> do you detect half tunnels ? Do you aggregate prefixes ?
RIPv6 is a cheap solution but I am not convinced it is the best
today, NHRP is a good candidate too.

   NHRP is not a routing protocol.  Are you proposing to confine 6bone
   to a single LIS so no routing would be necessary?
   
=> yes because we have a global connectivity on the Internet
then no intermediate routers are needed between clouds...
We need NHRP for other NBMAs too.

   > PS: perhaps we should create a 6bone IETF WG or to resume the TACIT WG
   > (one of the T of TACIT are for "tests" :-) ?

=> I still think we need a WG for the future of 6bone
(and not mix it with immediate operational issues).

Regards

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 22:21:00 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15760>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:23:27 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA15754>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:23:26 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01095>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:22:47 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id UAA13828; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:21:06 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA04488; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:21:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609111821.UAA04488@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Cc: mdp@tbit.dk, 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Sep 1996 10:23:40 PDT.
             <199609111723.KAA01887@stilton.cisco.com> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:21:00 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 In your previous mail you wrote:

   >> => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
   
       I say there is four.
   
       - Use static routing. Build a backbone of nodes so most connected (tail)
         sites use prefix 0/0 to get to the backbone. Their tunnel endpoint
         routers are configured with a /64 for the site (and other sites they
         connect). The backbone routers pass around /32 (routes on AS numbers
         only). 
   
       This should hold us for a long time until the specs are stable.
   
=> I can see two problems with this :
 - the AS number space is flat then we'll get a large number of
 static routes on the backbone boxes. We can develop special tools
 but we have limited man-power...
 - if you have a backbone everybody want to be in it. It is (too) human,
 if you don't believe me tell me what is the backbone router for the USA!
Static routing still works today then we should think about next steps...

Regards

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 04:43:50 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17195>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:44:03 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA17189>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:44:01 -0700
Received: from kalae.kohala.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02274>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:43:52 -0700
Received: from kohala.kohala.com (kohala.kohala.com [206.62.226.33]) by kalae.kohala.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA02426; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:43:51 -0700 (MST)
Received: by kohala.kohala.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id LAA05952; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:43:51 -0700
Message-Id: <199609111843.LAA05952@kohala.kohala.com>
From: rstevens@kohala.com (W. Richard Stevens)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 11:43:50 -0700
Reply-To: "W. Richard Stevens" <rstevens@kohala.com>
X-Phone: +1 520 297 9416
X-Homepage: http://www.noao.edu/~rstevens
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: ganis@VNET.IBM.COM, 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: ipv6 addresses
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

A couple of other things to think about, when joining the 6bone,
from recent experience.

- You'll need a nameserver that understands AAAA records, along with
  secondaries that also understand these.  I think a lot of people are
  making an ipv6 subdomain that they then get delegated to themselves
  within their organization for this.  (I just upgraded my nameserver
  to BIND-4.9.4 but then have to change secondaries from my ISP, to a
  secondary that understands AAAA records.)

- Don't forget the ip6.int delegation for reverse mapping.  Bill Manning
  (bmanning@isi.edu) is doing these and he allocates them with a /32, so
  you need to coordinate this with whoever in your organization is
  responsible for your ASN.

	Rich Stevens

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 11:03:16 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18400>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:03:33 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18390>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:03:20 -0700
Received: from lobster.wellfleet.com (lobster.corpeast.baynetworks.com) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03000>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:03:18 -0700
Received: from pobox.BayNetworks.com by lobster.wellfleet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-4.1)
	id PAA20060; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 15:06:37 -0400
Received: from andover.engeast by pobox.BayNetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA25382; Wed, 11 Sep 96 15:03:16 EDT
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 15:03:16 EDT
From: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Message-Id: <9609111903.AA25382@pobox.BayNetworks.com>
To: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


> From Francis.Dupont@inria.fr Wed Sep 11 14:01:54 1996
>    
>    > From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
>    > => there are three solutions for the dynamic routing of the 6 bone:
>    >  - RIPv6 but RIPv6 doesn't scale (remember DVMRP) and is not specified
>    >  for the usage over tunnels.
>    
>    How come? Why should RIPv6 work differently over tunnels?
> 
> => it is not clear if a tunnel is an interface (with what kind
> of properties) and RIPv6 doesn't manage half connectivity.
> DVMRP is a distance vector routing protocol with special hooks
> for tunnel and is not the good solution for the Mbone.
> I believe we should avoid the same error...
>

A statuc tunnel is an interface with the same properties as any other
point-to-point interface/link. It has its own L2 encapsulation scheme, i.e.
IPv4 header (or IPv6 header for IPv6-in-IPv6 tunnels). That is all to it.

The RIPv6 problem that it does not manage half connectivity is not
confound to p-to-p/tunnel links.  The same problem exists on broadcast
links -- e.g., you can have a bad Ethernet port that can transmit but
does not receive. ND's NUD can help somewhat here (yes, on tunnels too).

>    As I see it, tunnel is just an instance of 'normal' point-to-point interface.
> 
> => have tunnels link-local addresses (interface => link-local address
> according to RFCs) ?

They better have. My tunnels have.

>Are tunnels point-to-point or NBMA ?

Static tunnels are point-to-point.  I guess you can play NBMA games
with tunnels too but I don't see any point in it except making things
much more complex than they ought to be.

> How the "multicast" is done on tunnels ? It is not so clear.

This is trivial -- there is only one recipient of multicast traffic
over a tunnel (the same as a broadcast link with only two stations attached).

>    The fact that IPv6 packets are encapsulated into IPv4 frames at
>    link layer should not matter at network layer.  Do you tweak
>    your network protocols for each meadia it may run over?  I don't.
> 
> => RIPv6 is specified for LANs (in the mind of its authors).
>
Not in the mind of a reader? :)

>    Here at Bay we have a generic RIPv6 implementation which runs over tunnels
>    as specified -- the same way it runs over other types of links.
>    
> => do you detect half tunnels ?

We can use NUD for that.  I aggree that is may not be a perfect solution
but as, I said, the problem is non confound to tunnels.

>Do you aggregate prefixes ?

If the routing policy say so? What is has to do with tunnels?

> RIPv6 is a cheap solution but I am not convinced it is the best
> today, NHRP is a good candidate too.
>
RIPv6 will be the most commonly avalable solution for dynamic IPv6 routing
in a short run.

>    NHRP is not a routing protocol.  Are you proposing to confine 6bone
>    to a single LIS so no routing would be necessary?
>    
> => yes because we have a global connectivity on the Internet
> then no intermediate routers are needed between clouds...
> We need NHRP for other NBMAs too.
>
This going to be one monstrous LIS :) It will not scale and the most
of all it is not needed.

>    > PS: perhaps we should create a 6bone IETF WG or to resume the TACIT WG
>    > (one of the T of TACIT are for "tests" :-) ?
> 
> => I still think we need a WG for the future of 6bone
> (and not mix it with immediate operational issues).
> 
> Regards
> 
> Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
> 
Regards,
 Dimitry

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 09:19:51 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19378>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:21:59 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19372>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:21:58 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03897>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:21:57 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 1317"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I9CT8SU9IM002CTI@FNAL.FNAL.GOV>;
 Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:21:54 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id OAA16707; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:19:52 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 14:19:51 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
In-Reply-To: "11 Sep 1996 10:23:40 PDT."
 <"199609111723.KAA01887"@stilton.cisco.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: Dino Farinacci <dino@CISCO.COM>
Message-Id: <199609111919.OAA16707@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>     I [Dino] say there are four.
>     - Use static routing. Build a backbone of nodes so most connected (tail)
>       sites use prefix 0/0 to get to the backbone. Their tunnel endpoint
>       routers are configured with a /64 for the site (and other sites they
>       connect). The backbone routers pass around /32 (routes on AS numbers
>       only).

That's exactly what FNAL is doing, with ESNET as the provider, with
the modification that since I'm using a /16 IPv4 address in my
RFC1897 template, I have a /48 IPv6 prefix.

And note that I did indeed select 0::/0 as my default route to the
provider, rather than 5f00::/8.
					Matt

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 23:51:15 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20522>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:51:24 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20515>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:51:21 -0700
Received: from concorde.inria.fr by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05356>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:51:19 -0700
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id VAA14217; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 21:51:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from givry.inria.fr (givry.inria.fr [128.93.8.18]) by givry.inria.fr (8.7.1/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA04670; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 21:51:17 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609111951.VAA04670@givry.inria.fr>
From: Francis Dupont <Francis.Dupont@inria.fr>
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com (Dimitry Haskin)
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 11 Sep 1996 15:03:16 EDT.
             <9609111903.AA25382@pobox.BayNetworks.com> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 21:51:15 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Obviously there are very different ways to see tunnels (:-)!
It is not a problem with an exception: the NUD detection.
This issue has already been discussed but without a conclusion
(no agreement).

Francis.Dupont@inria.fr

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 05:51:45 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20548>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:52:32 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20542>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:52:28 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05390>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:52:25 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id MAA13307; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:51:45 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 12:51:45 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199609111951.MAA13307@stilton.cisco.com>
To: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr
Cc: mdp@tbit.dk, 6bone@isi.edu
In-Reply-To: <199609111821.UAA04488@givry.inria.fr> (message from Francis Dupont on Wed, 11 Sep 1996 20:21:00 +0200)
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>  - the AS number space is flat then we'll get a large number of
>>  static routes on the backbone boxes. We can develop special tools
>>  but we have limited man-power...
   
    That is because the 6bone is using RFC1897.

>>  - if you have a backbone everybody want to be in it. It is (too) human,
>>  if you don't believe me tell me what is the backbone router for the USA!
>> Static routing still works today then we should think about next steps...

    Right, so what. The ones that connect to it will be 2nd tier nodes. If
    they don't want to provide 2nd tier service, they don't tunnel with a
    backbone router. They tunnel with a 2nd tier node.

    Making the tunnel topology hierarchical from the start will avoid the
    constant entropy of meshing. I know this may be hard to enforce but 
    backbone router tunnel subscriptions can be denied for tail users.

    If you don't understand what I mean. Just use the model that NSFnet
    had. One backbone with many regionals attaching to it. Then sites
    only attached to the regionals. It works and proved to scale to a 
    specific size.

Dino
    

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 06:01:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20888>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:01:22 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20882>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:01:18 -0700
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA05811>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:01:17 -0700
Received: (dino@localhost) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id NAA13678; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:01:09 -0700
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:01:09 -0700
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199609112001.NAA13678@stilton.cisco.com>
To: dhaskin@baynetworks.com
Cc: Francis.Dupont@inria.fr, 6bone@ISI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <9609111903.AA25382@pobox.BayNetworks.com> (dhaskin@baynetworks.com)
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>> RIPv6 will be the most commonly avalable solution for dynamic IPv6 routing
>> in a short run.

    True. Then we should have the backbone routers that route on /32s pass
    them around with RIPv6. The 2nd tier routers and site routers still 
    use static.

Dino

   

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 06:17:12 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23070>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:21:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA23062>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:21:12 -0700
Received: from wayback.uoregon.edu by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06750>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:21:11 -0700
Received: (from meyer@localhost) by wayback.uoregon.edu (8.7.5/8.7.1) id NAA14168; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:17:12 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199609112017.NAA14168@wayback.uoregon.edu>
X-Mailer: exmh version 1.6.9 8/22/96
To: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, Dino Farinacci <dino@CISCO.COM>
Subject: 6Bone routing looop [Was: Re: 6Bone Mail]
X-Uri: "http://ns.uoregon.edu/~meyer"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:17:12 -0700
From: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


	Timely discussion. There there appears to be a routing
	loop between

	 cisco-6bone-router (5F00:6D00:C01F:0700:0001:0060:3E11:6770)

	and

	 netlag-chunnel (5F10:8800:C7AB:1500:0001::0001)



	Dave



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 06:43:02 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24644>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:44:52 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24638>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:44:51 -0700
Received: from puli.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA07908>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:44:50 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by puli.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id NAA09813; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:43:02 -0700
Message-Id: <199609112043.NAA09813@puli.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 1996 13:43:02 PDT
In-Reply-To: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
       "6Bone routing looop [Was: Re: 6Bone Mail]" (Sep 11,  1:17pm)
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>,
        Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: 6Bone routing loop
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU, Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Dave,

  You'll need to provide more data to me (perhaps offline so as
not to disturb everyone else).  I just checked and things seem
fine from 6bone-router's perspective (details appended).

Ran
rja@cisco.com


>From sho ipv6 route:

S 5F10:8800/32 [1/0]
  via 0::0, Tunnel5, 2d05h/never

>From traceroute ipv6 netlag-chunnel:

Tracing the route to netlag-chunnel (5F10:8800:C7AB:1500:0001::0001)

  1 netlag-chunnel (5F10:8800:C7AB:1500:0001::0001) 308 msec 296 msec 284
msec


>From ping ipv6 netlag-chunnel:

Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 5F10:8800:C7AB:1500:0001::0001, timeout
is 2 seconds:
!!!.!
Success rate is 80 percent (4/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 304/310/320 ms


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 15:01:25 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03041>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:09:19 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03035>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:09:17 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA14858>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:09:15 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id TAA01097; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:01:26 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA26408; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:01:26 -0400
Message-Id: <9609112301.AA26408@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Re: 6Bone Mail 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 11 Sep 96 13:01:09 PDT."
             <199609112001.NAA13678@stilton.cisco.com> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 19:01:25 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

My two cents on this discussion.

1. I think NHRP is a bad idea per Francis.  As Dimitry pointed out treating 
the 6bone as a LIS is not worthy of what I think its purpose is for presently.
From a networking computer science perspective though tunnels are NBMA
like, but a network 6bone tunnel to connect should not take on the semantics 
and limitations of NBMA or advantages its just a tunnel folks.

2. I think Dino's idea of static routes is a good one but agree with Craig
on 5f00/8, as 0/0 just sends everything and I don't want to debug
accidents in forwarding but only IPv6 configuration or prefix errors.
But I think we need a mechanism a.s.a.p. to discover tunnels between two
links connected by a router when one of the routers is an IPv4 node
in the way between two IPv6 islands.   I think hard conifguring this is
going to be a pain real soon.  Mike Shand had an idea and so do I so
will connect with Mike off line.  I prefer it not affecting RIPv6 but I
think it might have too.

3.  We also should not constrain again I say the 6bone and leave it open
to any who want to forward packets.  I already fear Czars who think they
might own routing in a particular region in the context of some mail.
Well just like in real life this will not fly.  We need to be prepared for a
very complicated topology where different sites will route packets
based on some relationship unforseen at this point.  No Czars.
In addition folks who build routers and forwarding code in Hosts will
want to test their implementation too.

4.  This SHOULD NOT be an IETF activity.  If we find an error in the
IPv6 portfolio of specifications then we need to take that back to the
IETF.  Lets not get bogged down in a standards game as we evolve the
6bone.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 11 15:11:07 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03271>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:18:14 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA03264>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:18:12 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA15220>; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 16:18:10 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id TAA19951; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:11:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA26778; Wed, 11 Sep 1996 19:11:07 -0400
Message-Id: <9609112311.AA26778@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: "Matthew R. Ganis (914) 684-4575" <ganis@VNET.IBM.COM>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU
Subject: Re: ipv6 addresses 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 11 Sep 96 12:47:48 EDT."
             <199609111647.AA25917@venera.isi.edu> 
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 96 19:11:07 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


>Who is allocating ipv6 addresses ??  We're starting to bring up
>some ipv6 machines in our lab, get some experience, and then attempt
>to connect to the 6-bone.  I'd like to get some officially assigned
>addresses now

I for one took your message that you knew about RFC 1897 and want a
"real" IPv6 address.  For now to play 1897 will work.  But this has come
up before and a real issue for some end users today and I believe
a lot within 1 year.  The draft on the table that solves this problem is
as follows:  

   "An IPv6 Provider-Based Unicast Address Format", Y. Rekhter, P.  Lothberg, 
   R. Hinden,, 04/03/1996, <draft-ietf-ipngwg-unicast-addr-fmt-04.txt>

The problem is that if you read it there is a place to define the registry
bits and that requires some kind of international coordination with
IANA and algorithm so it can move to Proposed Standard.  People are
working on it and I think it should be a topic of discussion at the IPng
meeting in San Jose Dec 1996.  This needs to get fixed and done
a.s.a.p.  

We already have some folks who have annouced real IPv6 products (and I
predict a lot more will by March 1997) and customers are going to buy them.  
Now we need real IPv6 addresses for them.  This 1897 strategy is not going to 
fly with the buying public.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Thu Sep 12 12:27:45 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14341>; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:27:53 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA14330>; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:27:50 -0700
Received: from inner.net (avarice.inner.net) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02863>; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 13:27:48 -0700
Received: from inner.net (lust.inner.net [199.33.248.1]) by inner.net (8.7.5/42) with ESMTP id UAA02233 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Thu, 12 Sep 1996 20:27:46 GMT
Message-Id: <199609122027.UAA02233@inner.net>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: First (and early) version of v6tools
X-Copyright: Copyright 1996, Craig Metz, All Rights Reserved.
X-Reposting-Policy: With explicit permission only
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 16:27:45 -0400
From: Craig Metz <cmetz@inner.net>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


	I'm making a few (currently two, but there are more on the way) IPv6-
capable tools I've written available for anonymous ftp on ftp.ipv6.inner.net.

	The first tool, v6wrapper, is a minimal moral equivalent to
tcp_wrappers -- it allows you to run different daemons and/or reject a
connection based on service and address criteria.

	The second, addrform, is a simple program designed to be used with
v6wrapper that uses the IPV6_ADDRFORM setsockopt() to up/downgrade a socket.

	Note that this ftp server is only reachable from the 6bone. If you
don't have routing set up that would allow you to reach the server, please
drop me a note.

									-Craig

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Fri Sep 13 07:26:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25809>; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:33:16 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25802>; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:33:14 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA06895>; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:33:11 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id LAA16601; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:26:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA24972; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 11:26:25 -0400
Message-Id: <9609131526.AA24972@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: FYI IPv6 Next Interoperability Event
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 96 11:26:24 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Just to let you know this will be just before the next IETF meeting.
WOuld be nice to see those on the 6bone whose implementations have not
been at "any" bake-offs to show up and really test your code you can't
do this on the 6bone.

/jim

------- Forwarded Message

Return-Path: owner-ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Received: from hunch.zk3.dec.com by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA31645; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:04:19 -0400
Received: from mail12.digital.com by hunch.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/11Mar96-0342PM)
	id AA10202; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 08:04:16 -0400
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id HAA24209; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 07:58:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by mercury.Sun.COM (Sun.COM)
	id EAA10070; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:46:41 -0700
Received: from sunroof.eng.sun.com by Eng.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-5.3)
	id EAA25126; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:46:32 -0700
Received: by sunroof.eng.sun.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA04950; Fri, 13 Sep 96 04:51:34 PDT
Received: from Eng.Sun.COM (engmail2) by sunroof.eng.sun.com.eng.sun.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA04944; Fri, 13 Sep 96 04:51:21 PDT
Received: from mercury.Sun.COM by Eng.Sun.COM (SMI-8.6/SMI-5.3)
	id EAA25099; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:45:38 -0700
Received: by mercury.Sun.COM (Sun.COM)
	id EAA09972; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 04:45:39 -0700
Received: from whitec.sr.unh.edu by unh.edu with SMTP id AA26524
  (5.67b+/IDA-1.5 for <@unh.edu:ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM>); Fri, 13 Sep 1996 07:45:36 -0400
Received: by whitec.sr.unh.edu (940816.SGI.8.6.9/921111.SGI)
	for ipng@sunroof.Eng.Sun.COM id HAA28006; Fri, 13 Sep 1996 07:49:12 -0400
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 07:49:12 -0400
From: Bill.Lenharth@unh.edu (William Lenharth)
Message-Id: <199609131149.HAA28006@whitec.sr.unh.edu>
To: ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Subject: (IPng 2101) Dec '96 - IPv6 test period
X-Status: N
X-Mailer: Applixware 4.0(429.85)
Sender: owner-ipng@sunroof.eng.sun.com
Precedence: bulk

UNH will hold it's third IPv6 test Period on Dec 1 - 5, 1996 at the
New England Center in Durham, NH.

Due to space restrictions that test period will be held at the New England Center for Continuing Education with setup to on Sunday the
first of December and teardown to complete at 6pm on Thursday.  
We are sorry for any inconvience that this may cause and UNH
personnel will be available to prestage your equipment on Sunday.
The test period will cost $1250.00 for non-members and there will be
a nominal charge for members to cover the increased food costs at
the New England Center.  Please check our Web page for updates
and advisory information.  We advise reserving rooms at the NEC
early.  We look foreward to seeing you here in sunny New Hampshire.

William Lenharth

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Mailing List		      FTP archive: ftp.parc.xerox.com:/pub/ipng
IPng Home Page:          	      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com

------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sat Sep 14 01:21:53 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18763>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:22:02 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18757>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:22:00 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA22137>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:22:00 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:21:58 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007800ae607c21ff9e@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <9609071443.ZM26132@rennsport.nas.nasa.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 1996 08:21:53 -0700
To: "Andrew J. Hoag" <ahoag@nas.nasa.gov>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: Geographically-based 3D map
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu, ipv6-ops@nas.nasa.gov
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Andrew,

>There is now a geographically-based map available on the WWW. Using tools
>borrowed from the Mbone visualization, we at NAS have come up with a VRML
>model
>of the 6bone with all the tunnels that we could find represented. The URL f=
or
>the new map is:
>
>http://www.nas.nasa.gov/NAS/Groups/netops/IPv6/viz/index.html
>
>There are static GIFs available as well, for those without VRML browsers. I=
 am
>still missing IPv4 endpoints for U of Oregon and KEK/JP (I guessed on KEK).=
 If
>anyone can provide those to me I will add them to the map.

Looks very neat, thanks for doing it.  I will add a pointer to it from the
6bone web page.


>In the near future, we hope to publish a database of the available tunnels =
and
>allow for everyone to update it themselves. This hopefully will provide the
>most current repository for sites and contacts.

Can you say more about the general intent of this database in comparison to
Geert Jan's.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 14 20:02:33 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29753>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 21:03:23 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA29747>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 21:03:22 -0700
Received: from bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08194>; Sat, 14 Sep 1996 21:03:21 -0700
Received: (from a030058t@localhost) by bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us (8.6.12/8.6.12) id AAA19387; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 00:02:33 -0400
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 1996 00:02:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Richard Belanger <a030058t@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Subject: Re: 6bone map - new tunnel from Cisco/US to UOregon/US
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6BONE Mailer <6bone@ISI.EDU>,
        "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
In-Reply-To: <v03007800ae55fef0ec4a@[128.3.9.22]>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9609142313.A16845-0100000@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I live in South Florida near Fort Lauderdale, what is my closest 
contact point to the mbone? Is it possible to reach a transmission speed of 
100 kbd/s on a SLIP OR PPP connection for videoconferencing.  I'm looking 
for an ISP thas has nationwide internet access by local number.

a030058t@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us


On Fri, 6 Sep 1996, Bob Fink LBNL wrote:

> Dave Meyer caught me before I left!
> 
> 6bone map version 14 (6 Sep 96) adds tunnels from Cisco/US to UOregon/US.
> 
> Bob
> 
> http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/
> 
> 
> ============
> To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
> Subject: Re: no 6bone map changes till the 16th Sep
> Date: Fri, 06 Sep 1996 08:33:09 -0700
> From: "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
> 
> 
> Bob,
> 
> The University of Oregon has just brought up a tunnel to
> Cisco. Have a good trip (vacation, I hope).
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dave
> -
> 
> 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Sun Sep 15 09:56:59 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09686>; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:04:52 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA09680>; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:04:51 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA24203>; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 11:04:48 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id NAA04204; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 13:56:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA12555; Sun, 15 Sep 1996 13:56:59 -0400
Message-Id: <9609151756.AA12555@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: ipv6imp@munnari.oz.au, 6bone@isi.edu
Cc: bound@zk3.dec.com
Subject: UPDATE: Digital Alpha UNIX IPv6 X5.1A Kit and 6bone Sites In Process
Date: Sun, 15 Sep 96 13:56:59 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Attached is a pointer to our updated kit if you want to use IPv6 or participate 
on the 6bone.  If you pull the kit across would you send a message to
bound@zk3.dec.com just letting me know you pulled the kit across. There
is also a pointer to a kit for an IPv6 WWW Server/Client/Browser too.

Also you can get prototypes running IPv6 for a Digital Switch and 
Router running RIPv6:  

	DECSwitch900EF - (also known as WGE) - 1 FDDI, 6 Ethernet ports.
	DECSwitch900EE - (also known as WGE) - 7 Ethernet ports.
	RouteAbout Access - (also known as AW90) - 1 Ethernet, 2 WAN ports
	RouteAbout Central - (also known as AW900) - 2 Ethernet, 8 WAN ports

Digital will be bringing up soon with some other partners a 6bone
routing point in Palo Alto CA and Karlsrue Germany to add to the points
of routability on the 6bone.  

These implementations have and will continue to participate in the UNH
Interoperability Events and at the next Connectathon event too.  We will
be ready to test IPSEC using the PF_KEY API for security at the next UNH
event and key management maybe depending on if the IETF makes that
critical decision before Nov 15, 1996.  It won't go into the kit until
we test with our colleagues via other vendors and other implementors as
interoperating with yourself is a very minor proofpoint when doing
Internet engineering.

You can also view our IPv6 WWW page at:

http://www.digital.com/info/ipv6/

It is under-construction and I just updated the html and it should be
completed by the time I get to Interop next week.  There is a public
IPv6 White Paper there too we are disseminating via one of the
hot-buttons.

have fun IPv6ing, 
/jim

---------------------------------

The Digital UNIX IPV6 Prototype team is pleased to announce the availability of
the latest IPV6 Binary kit for Digital UNIX V3.2C or V3.2D.  This kit is 
available via Anonymous FTP at the following location:

	ftp://sipper.zk3-x.dec.com/pub/ipv6_binary_X5.1a.tar.Z

Also available at this time is an IPv6 capable Web Server and Browser kit.  The
kit can be found at:

	ftp://sipper.zk3-x.dec.com/pub/ipv6_www_X5.1.tar.Z

The kits are also available on the 6bone at sipper.ipv6.zk3-x.dec.com
(5F0D:E900:CE98:A300::800:2B39:F505).

The IPv6 for Digital UNIX kit supports the IPV6 base protocol and addressing
specifications, along with ICMPv6, Stateless Address Autoconfiguration, Path MTU
Discovery, and Neighbor Discovery.  It is capable of acting as a BIND server for
AAAA records, and of forwarding packets as a router (via static routes only).
Also, it includes the BSD API specified in Internet Draft
draft-ietf-ipngwg-bsd-api-05.txt, a Work in Progress.

There are a few limitations which should be pointed out:

      - Limit of 1 LAN interface.  Only a single Ethernet
	or FDDI interface is supported in this release, in
	addition to the loopback and tunnelling interfaces.

      - Incompatible with Digital UNIX V3.2C ATM options.
	Due to differences in the kernel networking infrastructure,
	this kit prevents the ATM options from being linked into
	the kernel.

      - Multi-processor (SMP) systems are not currently supported.

Further details on the installation, configuration, and use of this kit can be
found in the kit, in file /usr/share/ipv6/icu_guide.txt. The following notes are
corrections or modifications which should be read carefully, as they may require
user action to make the IPv6 kit function as described in the icu_guide.txt.


    1.  The ping6 and netstat6 utilities have incorrect permission
    settings.  Please execute the following commands after running
    ip6_install:

        # chmod 4755 /usr/sbin/ping6
        # chmod 4755 /usr/sbin/netstat6

    2.  In the icu_guide.txt, the description of adding an ARP entry
    is incorrect.  It should read as follows:

        # route6 add -inet -host <ipv4-address> -link <link-address> -interface
        # route6 add -inet -host 3.4.5.6 -link le0:08:00:2b:00:34:56 -interface

    3.  If using the BIND server, execute the following commands to insure
    that the proper image is started:

        # mv /sbin/named /sbin/named.DIST
        # ln -s /usr/sbin/named /sbin/named

    4.  The BIND example file /usr/share/ipv6/named.boot should be modified
    so that the system is not listed as the primary server for the IP6.INT
    domain.

Finally, this kit is available for use and evaluation, but is not
officially supported by Digital Equipment Corporation.  Its use
in a production environment would not be recommended.  We would
appreciate any and all feedback about features, bugs, or wishlist
items, but we may not be able to respond to every mail.  Please
send your comments and suggestions to:

	mailto:ipv6-uproto-feedback@netrix.lkg.dec.com


------- End of Forwarded Message


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 00:43:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28821>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:46:00 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA28815>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:45:58 -0700
Received: from jpd.ch.man.ac.uk by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA19933>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 15:45:57 -0700
Received: (from jcday@localhost) by jpd.ch.man.ac.uk (8.7.5/8.7.3) id XAA01662 for 6bone@isi.edu; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:43:40 +0100
From: Jonathan Day <jcday@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <199609162243.XAA01662@jpd.ch.man.ac.uk>
Subject: Quick query
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:43:39 +0100 (BST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Hi

Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask, but I was
wondering where to get information on getting attached
to the 6bone. 

(Problem #1 -- this computer is in the UK - not a place
that features heavily in the information I've seen so
far. Problem #2 -- Linux IPv6 code is getting on, but
it isn't what you might call state-of-the-art.)

Any suggestions (other than getting a decent machine :)
would be welcome.

Jonathan


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 10:03:58 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02891>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:04:06 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA02885>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:04:04 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25227>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:04:04 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:04:03 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v0300780fae639a99fa7d@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: 
 <Pine.3.89.9609142313.A16845-0100000@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
References: <v03007800ae55fef0ec4a@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 17:03:58 -0700
To: Richard Belanger <a030058t@bcfreenet.seflin.lib.fl.us>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone map - new tunnel from Cisco/US to UOregon/US
Cc: 6BONE Mailer <6bone@isi.edu>,
        "David M. Meyer 541/346-1747" <meyer@network-services.uoregon.edu>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

At 9:02 PM -0700 9/14/96, Richard Belanger wrote:
>I live in South Florida near Fort Lauderdale, what is my closest
>contact point to the mbone? Is it possible to reach a transmission speed of
>100 kbd/s on a SLIP OR PPP connection for videoconferencing.  I'm looking
>for an ISP thas has nationwide internet access by local number.

=46or mbone info you should look at an mbone site:

	http://www.best.com/~prince/techinfo/mbone.html

I can't help you on mbone beyond that.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 11:19:48 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06165>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:20:05 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06159>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:20:03 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28399>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:20:02 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:20:03 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007811ae63ac772da1@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:19:48 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: database of the available tunnels
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

I had recently asked Andrew Hoag to elaborate on his comment about a
database of the available tunnels and received the following reply,
reposted here with his permission.


Bob

=3D=3D=3D=3D
> >In the near future, we hope to publish a database of the available
>tunnels and
> >allow for everyone to update it themselves. This hopefully will provide t=
he
> >most current repository for sites and contacts.
>
> Can you say more about the general intent of this database in comparison t=
o
> Geert Jan's.

After discussing this with others in our group here, and a gauge of general
feelings I think I misspoke. I do not intend to replace or obsolete Geert Ja=
n's
effort in the IPv6 Registry...

My original issue was that in producing this map I had to cull information f=
rom
not only his registry, but several other sources as well. I wanted the map t=
o
be as complete as possible. Since I had all of the information in one place,=
 I
thought it made sense to make that info available.

However, short of contacting each individual IPv6 site, I would be making th=
at
information available generally without their consent. Maybe this is not an
issue, but at least with Geert Jan's Registry the parties involved have to
actively make their site info public, whereis I would be doing it for them (=
at
least initially).

In any case, I have decided to hold off on publishing what I already have. I
may still build the tools or work with Geert Jan to improve them, but for th=
e
time being I think I'll leave it well enough alone.


--
| Andrew Hoag      | MS 258-6                | Voice: (415) 604-4972 |
| Network Engineer | Moffett Field, CA 94035 |   Fax: (415) 604-4377 |
| High-Speed LAN   +------------------------+---+--------------------+
| NAS Facility     | http://www.gac.edu/~ahoag/ | ahoag@nas.nasa.gov |
--



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 11:33:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06474>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:33:56 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA06468>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:33:55 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA28774>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:33:54 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:33:54 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007812ae63af96e93a@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 18:33:46 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: draft of some hookup info
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

In an attempt to provide some of the most often asked info about hooking up
to the 6bone I've created the following page:

	http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone_hookup.html

Before I refer to it from the 6bone home page, please take a look and
comment (to the list please) so I can refine or rewrite :-) it.


The 6bone home page now has a pointer to the neat NAS provided 3D
geographic 6bone maps.  I will continue to keep up the simple "bubble"
diagram until it becomes too unwieldy to do so.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 18:32:09 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08415>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 19:40:26 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA08407>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 19:40:23 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA01183>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 19:40:20 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id WAA11401; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 22:32:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA15700; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 22:32:09 -0400
Message-Id: <9609170232.AA15700@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Sep 96 18:19:48 PDT."
             <v03007811ae63ac772da1@[128.3.9.22]> 
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 96 22:32:09 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Fine...

Would all who would like to please send me:

1. your ipv4 address to reach your tunnel.
2. the IPv6 prefix to route to your tunnel
3. nodes inside your tunnel we can test our ipv6 apps against.

there are other lists out there and one our node sipper was on WITH
INCORRECT information about its capabilities and being sent only to
those who are routing packets.  This is just bogus and lets keep this an
open process.  Especially since the node was updated with new
functionality and we had no way to even know to tell the Czar to update
the freakin database.

For those who want this to be a closed process lets not let them do that
and if necessary we can set up a routing network around them.

I don't want to hear about what the Mbone did anymore.  Its not a
production network after many years and IPv6 can wait that long.  Have
you seen the various meltdown news flashes on the Internet and how some
small ISPs packets are getting blocked and even potentially being put
out of business.  6bone needs to be wide open and lots of testing even
if it breaks which is part of testing.  It also should not be held up
from growing exponentially.

There is nothing wrong with multiple sites routing packets for everyones
tunnels.  In fact you may find eventually some folks route IPv6 throught
the tunnels faster and in fact competition of this nature will foster
better and high performining implementations (again unlike the Mbone).

Anything I get will be published widely I will state up front.

/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 13:28:12 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12695>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:30:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12689>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:30:46 -0700
Received: from rennsport.nas.nasa.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02732>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:30:45 -0700
Received: (from ahoag@localhost)
	by rennsport.nas.nasa.gov (8.6.12/NAS.6.1) id UAA04778; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:28:12 -0700
From: "Andrew J. Hoag" <ahoag@nas.nasa.gov>
Message-Id: <9609162028.ZM4777@rennsport.nas.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:28:12 -0700
In-Reply-To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
        "Re: database of the available tunnels" (Sep 16, 10:32pm)
References: <9609170232.AA15700@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.3 08feb96 MediaMail)
To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels
Cc: ipv6-ops@nas.nasa.gov, 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

> Fine...
>
> Would all who would like to please send me:
>
> 1. your ipv4 address to reach your tunnel.
> 2. the IPv6 prefix to route to your tunnel
> 3. nodes inside your tunnel we can test our ipv6 apps against.
>
> there are other lists out there and one our node sipper was on WITH
> INCORRECT information about its capabilities and being sent only to
> those who are routing packets.  This is just bogus and lets keep this an
> open process.  Especially since the node was updated with new
> functionality and we had no way to even know to tell the Czar to update
> the freakin database.

If enough people feel this would beneficial, I would be happy to "fg" my
registry project and throw up a quick web page where people can add their own
tunnels and maintain their own contact information. I would set it up in either
a shared password format (to keep out the pranksters) or an approval-based
format, but I would like the lowest latency updates as possible.

> There is nothing wrong with multiple sites routing packets for everyones
> tunnels.  In fact you may find eventually some folks route IPv6 throught
> the tunnels faster and in fact competition of this nature will foster
> better and high performining implementations (again unlike the Mbone).
>
> Anything I get will be published widely I will state up front.
>
> /jim
>-- End of excerpt from <bound@zk3.dec.com>

Well put!

-- 
| Andrew Hoag      | MS 258-6                | Voice: (415) 604-4972 |
| Network Engineer | Moffett Field, CA 94035 |   Fax: (415) 604-4377 |
| High-Speed LAN   +------------------------+---+--------------------+
| NAS Facility     | http://www.gac.edu/~ahoag/ | ahoag@nas.nasa.gov |
--

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 13:39:10 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12914>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:39:13 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA12908>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:39:11 -0700
Received: from cornpuffs.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02924>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:39:11 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by cornpuffs.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA09444 for 6bone@isi.edu; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:39:10 -0700
Message-Id: <199609170339.UAA09444@cornpuffs.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:39:10 PDT
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: connectivity data
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

While I share Jim's desire to get the connectivity spread widely among
the sites sending/receiving 6bone traffic, might it not be worth an
effort for everyone to send a current picture of their site to Geert Jan
so that we can really get the RIPE database current ??

Ran
rja@cisco.com


-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 19:49:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13377>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:51:24 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA13371>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:51:23 -0700
Received: from mail12.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA03515>; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 20:51:22 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail12.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id XAA19541; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:49:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA19205; Mon, 16 Sep 1996 23:49:39 -0400
Message-Id: <9609170349.AA19205@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: "Andrew J. Hoag" <ahoag@nas.nasa.gov>
Cc: ipv6-ops@nas.nasa.gov, 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Sep 96 20:28:12 PDT."
             <9609162028.ZM4777@rennsport.nas.nasa.gov> 
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 96 23:49:39 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Andrew,

Thats a good idea.  Good point on pranksters too.  I am off to Interop
and then have to travel on other place but count me in once I get back
and anything I can do to help I will.

How would we work the passwds? or whatever?  Not my forte....

thanks
/jim

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 12:34:37 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16548>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 03:47:50 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16542>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 03:47:33 -0700
Received: from oberon.di.fc.ul.pt by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA13906>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 03:46:51 -0700
Received: (from roque@localhost) by oberon.di.fc.ul.pt (8.6.6.Beta9/8.6.6.Beta9) id LAA12250; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:34:37 +0100
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:34:37 +0100
Message-Id: <199609171034.LAA12250@oberon.di.fc.ul.pt>
From: Pedro Roque Marques <roque@di.fc.ul.pt>
To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Cc: 6bone@ISI.EDU (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: <9609170232.AA15700@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
References: <v03007811ae63ac772da1@[128.3.9.22]>
	<9609170232.AA15700@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.69)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

>>>>> "bound" == bound  <bound@zk3.dec.com> writes:


    bound> For those who want this to be a closed process lets not let
    bound> them do that and if necessary we can set up a routing
    bound> network around them.

Jim,

i do share your global connectivity goals but i believe that the main
problem with the 6bone is that everybody has been "routing around
them" from the start. And it is not working too well.
We've have, as far as i understand, several groups that manage routing
information with little or no coordination among them.

It will be also useless to try to finger point people for the current
state of afairs. Personally, i believe we all have our share of
resposability on it.

My proposal is that we stablish an informal set peering etiquete rules.

    bound> There is nothing wrong with multiple sites routing packets
    bound> for everyones tunnels.

No, nothing wrong it that as long as routing information is
consistent. I doubt that currently that will be the case.

My proposal for peering rules:

a) Either a site runs default only to it's peer or it should
distribute, on every update, a copy of it's routing table to everybody
that peers with it. The idea is that you can run a distance vector
algorithm this way (we should agree on the format for this files so
that we can run scripts on them).
Better yet, we can add path information to the routes exported this
way and you have, in essence, a path based routing algorithm.

b) Non default sites should deposit regularly a copy of their routing
table and peering information on a well known place (RIPE or whatever).

c) A site should not limit trafic unless it clrearly states so in the
published information mentioned in b) (allow * policy by default)

    bound> In fact you may find eventually
    bound> some folks route IPv6 throught the tunnels faster and in
    bound> fact competition of this nature will foster better and high
    bound> performining implementations (again unlike the Mbone).

Ok agreed,
but instead of spliting in a miriad of different groups can we try,
at least once, to run *one* 6bone ?

regards,
  Pedro.

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Mon Sep 16 23:52:31 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19677>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:52:52 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA19671>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:52:49 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17201>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:52:48 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:52:45 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007802ae645d1db111@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 06:52:31 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone map change - new tunnel from NRL/US to NIST/US
Cc: Robert Glenn <glenn@snad.ncsl.nist.gov>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 15 (17 Sep 96) adds tunnel from NRL/US to NIST/US.


Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=46rom: Robert Glenn <glenn@snad.ncsl.nist.gov>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:27:37 -0400 (EDT)
To: rlfink@lbl.gov
Subject: NIST on the 6bone
Cc: rob.glenn@nist.gov


Bob,

NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) is now on the
6bone.  We are connected through NRL.

NIST's routing prefix is 5f00:3100::/32.

If you need anymore information please feel free to contact me.

Thanks,

Rob G.
rob.glenn@nist.gov
(301)975-3667



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 12:36:04 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20141>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:06:28 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA20135>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:06:25 -0700
Received: from ncc.ripe.net by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA18315>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:06:23 -0700
Received: from berklix.ripe.net by ncc.ripe.net with SMTP
	id AA13009 (5.65a/NCC-2.38); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 16:04:41 +0200
Received: from berklix.ripe.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by berklix.ripe.net (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA00565; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 10:36:05 +0200 (MET DST)
Message-Id: <199609170836.KAA00565@berklix.ripe.net>
To: bound@zk3.dec.com
Cc: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>, 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
X-Organization: RIPE Network Coordination Centre
X-Phone: +31 20 592 5065
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 16 Sep 1996 22:32:09 EDT."
             <9609170232.AA15700@fwasted.zk3.dec.com> 
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 10:36:04 +0200
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

On Mon, 16 Sep 96 22:32:09 -0400  bound@zk3.dec.com wrote:
> 1. your ipv4 address to reach your tunnel.
> 2. the IPv6 prefix to route to your tunnel
> 3. nodes inside your tunnel we can test our ipv6 apps against.

The first two points are already registered at the registry at the NCC;
I'm looking forward to see a proposal to do point 3 but have not
heard anything yet.

The comments on the 'FTP partking place' so far have been roughly:
- A few people wanted gegraphical info (which I did), and some 
  didn't want geographical data because it is too hard to obtain
  (that's why it's optional)
- Some people had problems with the SITE GROUP/SITE GPASS thing,
  I think I answered all of them.

> there are other lists out there and one our node sipper was on WITH
> INCORRECT information about its capabilities and being sent only to
> those who are routing packets.  This is just bogus and lets keep this an
> open process.  Especially since the node was updated with new
> functionality and we had no way to even know to tell the Czar to update
> the freakin database.

I don't know if this comment was for me but in that case please elaborate?

Geert Jan


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 04:40:12 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21072>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:42:24 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21066>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:42:22 -0700
Received: from fnal.fnal.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA19990>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:42:22 -0700
Received: from munin.fnal.gov ("port 3197"@munin.fnal.gov)
 by FNAL.FNAL.GOV (PMDF V5.0-5 #3998) id <01I9KX876RK4002K6R@FNAL.FNAL.GOV>;
 Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:42:17 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost.fnal.gov by munin.fnal.gov (8.7.3/SMI-4.1-m)
 id JAA09933; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:40:12 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:40:12 -0500
From: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
Subject: Re: draft of some hookup info
In-Reply-To: "16 Sep 1996 18:33:46 PDT." <"v03007812ae63af96e93a"@[128.3.9.22]>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
Message-Id: <199609171440.JAA09933@munin.fnal.gov>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
X-Face: 
 /RKQi"kntyd}7l)d8n%'Dum<~(aMW3,5g&'NiH5I4Jj|wT:j;Qa$!@A<~/*C:{:MmAQ:o%S /KKi}G4_.||4I[9!{%3]Hd"a*E{<k&QF?d6L7o&zLqb%kXn!!]ykXMKtTiy9#20]$EKP/^Z$T]'P6,
 8L#r&mH4PB<ljN,_.=iCpv#N:HIcy5t7{HV:<=g=V?^;-d,J*xkq0r
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

Could you add some emphasis to draw attention to the fact that an
RFC1897 format address includes the ASN of one's provider, not an ASN
that belongs to one's own site?  (But of course a provider uses its
own ASN.)
					Matt

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 00:56:49 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21430>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:56:59 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21424>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:56:57 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20613>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:56:57 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:56:55 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007806ae646c955417@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199609171440.JAA09933@munin.fnal.gov>
References: "16 Sep 1996 18:33:46 PDT."
 <"v03007812ae63af96e93a"@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 07:56:49 -0700
To: Matt Crawford <crawdad@fnal.gov>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: draft of some hookup info
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Matt,

>Could you add some emphasis to draw attention to the fact that an
>RFC1897 format address includes the ASN of one's provider, not an ASN
>that belongs to one's own site?  (But of course a provider uses its
>own ASN.)

Will do!


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 01:02:23 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21563>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:02:30 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21557>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:02:29 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20892>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:02:28 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:02:26 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007808ae646ddfa178@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199609170800.KAA17884@faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <v03007812ae63af96e93a@[128.3.9.22]> from "Bob Fink LBNL" at
 Sep 16, 96 06:33:46 pm
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:02:23 -0700
To: Erich Meier <Erich.Meier@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: draft of some hookup info
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Erich,

>> In an attempt to provide some of the most often asked info about hooking =
up
>> to the 6bone I've created the following page:
>>
>> 	http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone_hookup.html
>>
>> Before I refer to it from the 6bone home page, please take a look and
>> comment (to the list please) so I can refine or rewrite :-) it.
>
>Maybe you should add the diagram below taken from rfc1897 to the page and
>maybe
>provide an example. This eases figuring out the IPv6 address a lot.
>
>   | 3 |  5 bits  |  16 bits | 8 |   24 bits  | 8 | 16 bits|48 bits|
>   +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+
>   |   |          |Autonomous|   |    IPv4    |   | Subnet | Intf. |
>   |010|  11111   |  System  |RES|   Network  |RES|        |       |
>   |   |          |  Number  |   |   Address  |   | Address|  ID   |
>   +---+----------+----------+---+------------+---+--------+-------+

Sounds good, I'll do it!


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 01:03:13 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21594>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:03:23 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA21588>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:03:21 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA20926>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:03:20 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:03:18 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007807ae646ce86795@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199609170305.WAA00871@nyarlathotep.netlag.com>
References: <v03007812ae63af96e93a@[128.3.9.22]> from "Bob Fink LBNL" at
 Sep 16, 1996 06:33:46 PM
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 08:03:13 -0700
To: Matt Bush <xomox@netlag.com>
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: draft of some hookup info
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Matt,

>> In an attempt to provide some of the most often asked info about hooking =
up
>> to the 6bone I've created the following page:
>>
>> 	http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/6bone_hookup.html
>>
>> Before I refer to it from the 6bone home page, please take a look and
>> comment (to the list please) so I can refine or rewrite :-) it.
>>
>It may be useful to include a list of organisations which are willing
>to provide tunnel services, with information such as site contact
>and tunnel server address with which performance characteristics
>can be obtained, helping the fledgling find the "nearest" provider.
>In the near future, it may be best to contact your upstream provider
>to find if they offer such services (why i liked the prefix listing on
>early 6bone maps).  I, for example, would be willing to offer tunnels
>to others, but would be less than optimal for all but the closest
>organisations.

This one is a little hard for me to do without help from others.  If there
is sufficient response to the list from folks willing to provide service,
as well as providing me with this info, I will do it.

Comments anyone on the value of this??


>One more note is that it has been suggested by several persons that
>sites connect only to a single tunnel server, in order to prevent loops
>in the current topology.

I'll at least put a cautionary note in.


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 02:41:57 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27726>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:42:01 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA27720>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:42:00 -0700
Received: from cornpuffs.cisco.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA25466>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:41:59 -0700
Received: (rja@localhost) by cornpuffs.cisco.com (8.6.12/8.6.5) id JAA10294; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:41:57 -0700
Message-Id: <199609171641.JAA10294@cornpuffs.cisco.com>
From: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 09:41:57 PDT
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.5 10/14/92)
To: rlfink@lbl.gov
Subject: 6bone map from LBL
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Bob,

  I personally would find it easier to verify my routing table completeness
and accuracy if your map went back to its former self and included the
"Routing Prefix" for each site and also added a "Ping Address" for each site.
Others might also find this useful in keeping their tables current.

  It might also be useful if at some future data (say 1 October 96) the map
were revised to ONLY include data from the RIPE database (one has to register
with RIPE in order to show up on the LBL-maintained map).  It would be useful
if Kevin at NASA/Ames did the same thing with his map, IMHO.

  This small action would provide a very strong incentive for folks to keep
their data current in the RIPE IPv6 database.  By announcing this 10-14 days
before the policy took effect, everyone would have time to get their data
online at RIPE.  The only objective is to strongly encourage folks to keep
their data online at RIPE (which is open to everyone) and to encourage
everyone to keep that data accurate.

Best regards,

Ran
rja@cisco.com

PS:  I'll be updating cisco's entry at RIPE once Geert Jan has time to
     clarify some points that I'm confused about. :-)

-- 

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 10:47:24 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25517>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:47:35 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA25511>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:47:32 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA17481>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:47:31 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:47:30 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007818ae64f5b494b7@[128.3.9.22]>
In-Reply-To: <199609171641.JAA10294@cornpuffs.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 17:47:24 -0700
To: rja@cisco.com (Ran Atkinson)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone map from LBL
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Ran,

>  I personally would find it easier to verify my routing table completeness
>and accuracy if your map went back to its former self and included the
>"Routing Prefix" for each site and also added a "Ping Address" for each sit=
e.
>Others might also find this useful in keeping their tables current.
>
>  It might also be useful if at some future data (say 1 October 96) the map
>were revised to ONLY include data from the RIPE database (one has to regist=
er
>with RIPE in order to show up on the LBL-maintained map).  It would be usef=
ul
>if Kevin at NASA/Ames did the same thing with his map, IMHO.
>
>  This small action would provide a very strong incentive for folks to keep
>their data current in the RIPE IPv6 database.  By announcing this 10-14 day=
s
>before the policy took effect, everyone would have time to get their data
>online at RIPE.  The only objective is to strongly encourage folks to keep
>their data online at RIPE (which is open to everyone) and to encourage
>everyone to keep that data accurate.

I have been thinking along similar lines to use the map as way of getting
folk to register (and hopefully keep current) their RIPE-NCC IPv6 db info.

This would also be a good time to add back at least the "Routing Prefix"
for each site and possibly the "Ping Address".  Gee, if I got
sophisticated, I could maybe have a click sensitive map that allowed you to
click on the net and go directly to the RIPE-NCC IPv6 db entry.


Rather than shoot for 1 October I would like to shoot for 1 Nov or 1 Dec
for practical reasons.

How do others on the list feel about this??


Thanks,

Bob



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Tue Sep 17 23:54:26 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16876>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 06:54:48 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA16870>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 06:54:46 -0700
Received: from cnrmail.lbl.gov (buster.lbl.gov) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA02928>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 06:54:45 -0700
Received: from [128.3.9.22] by cnrmail.lbl.gov
 with ESMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1.1); Wed, 18 Sep 1996 06:54:32 -0800
X-Sender: rlfink@cnrmail.lbl.gov
Message-Id: <v03007803ae65af1f278f@[128.3.9.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 06:54:26 -0700
To: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
From: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: 6bone map change - new tunnel from UNI-C/DK to Telebit/DK
Cc: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

6bone drawing version 16 (18 Sep 96) adds tunnel from NRL/US to NIST/US.

Overlooked it on Monday when I returned, sorry.


Thanks.

Bob

http://www-6bone.lbl.gov/6bone/


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:33:10 +0200 (METDST)
=46rom: "Gudrun R. Dalgeir" <unigrd@unidhp1.uni-c.dk>
To: Bob Fink LBNL <RLFink@lbl.gov>
Subject: Re: 6bone map change - new tunnel from NRL/US to NIST/US
Mime-Version: 1.0

Bob,

   could you please update the map to include the new tunnel between
UNI-C and Telebit.

Cheers,

---------------- oo000oo ----------------------------------
Gudrun Dalgeir             phone  : (+) 45 35878532
UNI-C                      fax    : (+) 45 35878890
Vermundsgade 5             e-mail : Gudrun.Dalgeir@uni-c.dk
DK-2100 Kbh. O
-----------------------------------------------------------



From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 18 06:39:39 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18526>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 07:45:42 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA18520>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 07:45:40 -0700
Received: from mail13.digital.com by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA04966>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 07:45:38 -0700
Received: from fwasted.zk3.dec.com by mail13.digital.com (8.7.5/UNX 1.2/1.0/WV)
	id KAA29474; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 10:39:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Received: from localhost by fwasted.zk3.dec.com; (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/18Feb95-1123AM)
	id AA22364; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 10:39:40 -0400
Message-Id: <9609181439.AA22364@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
To: Geert Jan de Groot <GeertJan.deGroot@ripe.net>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Sep 96 10:36:04 +0200."
             <199609170836.KAA00565@berklix.ripe.net> 
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 96 10:39:39 -0400
X-Mts: smtp
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

Geert,

Comment was not for you fyi.  If anyone iws maintianing data about nodes
on the 6bone then all data regarding those nodes needs to be updated.
That should be done by the owner of those nodes not a registry or
backbone router.  So if anyone has questions about a Digital node aske
me.  If you have question about cisco node ask Ran, etc etc...  Thats my
point.  

How to I get that file from NCC you spoke of that tells about 1 and 2
from previous mail.?

I am at Interop as I write this mail (its slowwwww) and I am having
trouble getting to nodes on the 6bone with my route for 0/0 or 5f00/8
going thru UNH.  I can get to UNH and back and sipper.zk3-x.dec.com thru
UNH and Bay Networks but no where else?  But when I telnet6 into sipper
I can get tall the 6bone nodes.  I will call UNH Sebastien this a.m.


Here are our v6 addrs you can tunnel too our router ::45.12.64.248 on
the show floor.

5f00:2100:2d0c:4000:0c40:0000:f822:56e6         ni30
(ipv4 addr above is 45.12.64.230)

5f00:2100:2d0c:4000:0c40:0000:f822:64f4         ni31
(ipv4 addr above is 45.12.64.231)

should be able to set up route as:
5F00:2100:2D0C:4000::/80 ::45.12.64.248

thanks
/jim


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 18 08:00:52 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22257>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:58:56 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA22250>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:58:53 -0700
Received: from iol.unh.edu (sun4.iol.unh.edu) by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA07167>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:58:51 -0700
Received: from sparky.IOL.UNH.EDU by iol.unh.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA16510; Wed, 18 Sep 96 11:53:29 EDT
Received: by sparky.IOL.UNH.EDU (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id MAA01756; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:00:52 -0400
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:00:52 -0400
Message-Id: <199609181600.MAA01756@sparky.IOL.UNH.EDU>
From: Quaizar Vohra <qv@sparky.iol.unh.edu>
To: <bound@zk3.dec.com>
Cc: 6bone@isi.edu (6BONE Mailer)
Subject: Re: database of the available tunnels 
In-Reply-To: <9609181439.AA22364@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
References: <199609170836.KAA00565@berklix.ripe.net>
	<9609181439.AA22364@fwasted.zk3.dec.com>
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO

 > 
 > I am at Interop as I write this mail (its slowwwww) and I am having
 > trouble getting to nodes on the 6bone with my route for 0/0 or 5f00/8
 > going thru UNH.  I can get to UNH and back and sipper.zk3-x.dec.com thru
 > UNH and Bay Networks but no where else?  But when I telnet6 into sipper
 > I can get tall the 6bone nodes.  I will call UNH Sebastien this a.m.
 > 
 > 
 > Here are our v6 addrs you can tunnel too our router ::45.12.64.248 on
 > the show floor.
 > 
 > 5f00:2100:2d0c:4000:0c40:0000:f822:56e6         ni30
 > (ipv4 addr above is 45.12.64.230)
 > 
 > 5f00:2100:2d0c:4000:0c40:0000:f822:64f4         ni31
 > (ipv4 addr above is 45.12.64.231)
 > 
 > should be able to set up route as:
 > 5F00:2100:2D0C:4000::/80 ::45.12.64.248
 > 
 > thanks
 > /jim
 > 
 > 

Jim. since you are using UNH as a provider :-), let me assign you a
prefix which is covered by our 32 bit prefix 5f02:3000::/32. Just use
5f02:3000:84b1:7400::/64. You can further divide this prefix into
subnets as you like, using the 65-80 bits as subnet identifier.
I will set up a route for  you and the rest of the world won't have to
bother.

This will require you to reassign addresses on all your nodes, which is 
something you can demonstrate as easily done by IPv6 :-) 

Regards,
Quaizar

From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 18 08:33:16 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24557>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 09:34:36 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA24551>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 09:34:35 -0700
Received: from snad.ncsl.nist.gov by venera.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-25)
	id <AA08648>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 09:34:34 -0700
Received: from sloth.ncsl.nist.gov (sloth.ncsl.nist.gov [129.6.55.36]) by snad.ncsl.nist.gov (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA03839 for <6bone@isi.edu>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:33:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from glenn@localhost) by sloth.ncsl.nist.gov (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA05421 for 6bone@isi.edu; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:33:16 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 12:33:16 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199609181633.MAA05421@sloth.ncsl.nist.gov>
To: 6bone@isi.edu
Subject: Question regarding RFC1897?
From: 6bone@snad.ncsl.nist.gov
Reply-To: rob.glenn@nist.gov
Sender: owner-6bone@ISI.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Status: RO


Now that I've been bitten by the majordomo "sender must be subscribed" feature,
here is my third attempt at sending this...


While setting up our internal networks and DNS with RFC1897 addresses,
I became puzzled by the address format.

Assuming that there are very good reasons to use the *providers* ASN,
wouldn't it make more sense to use the IPv4 Network Address to represent
the Network Address given to you by the provider?  In other words
If you have a class A address the IPv4 Network Address field would be
0x0000AA, class B address would be 0x00BBBB, and so on.   Then the Subnet 
field could contain the remaining bits.

As it is currently defined, it is difficult to setup reverse DNS records.
Providers will have to maintain records for each IPv4 subnet that sites
want to run with IPv6.  Collisions may occur when sites don't work with
their providers.  Or in some cases, sites won't setup the reverse DNS just 
to avoid this problem. 

Ofcourse, if you use your own ASN, the problems go away. 

Rob G.
rob.glenn@nist.gov


From majordom@ISI.EDU  Wed Sep 18 03:11:46 1996
Received: by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26658>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 10:12:04 -0700
Received: from venera.isi.edu by zephyr.isi.edu (5.65c/5.61+local-23)
	id <AA26651>; Wed, 18 Sep 1996