Subject: comment on draft-lind-v6ops-isp-scenarios-00.txt

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 11:46:39 -0400

relative to the suggestion made at the meeting:

I think there are two purposes of this document:

1. to provide feedback to the protocol developers in IETF - are our
existing transition mechanisms adequate?  do we need new ones, or to
tweak existing ones?

2. to provide input to networks considering v6 deployment.

if NANOG/RIPE/APNIC/APRICOT/whomever could be recruited to contribute v6
experiences to this document, that would IMHO be great -  even if a lot
of the work were done outside of IETF.  but we would like to see the
drafts published as Internet-Drafts (even if available in another form)
and the result published as an RFC (even if published elsewhere) so that
IETF people will see the output.

in general I'd like to see more paths for feedback to IETF from the
operators' organizations.

Keith

---

From: HELENA RUTE SOFIA <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 03:14:40 -0400 (EDT)

Keith,
comments below...

> 2. to provide input to networks considering v6 deployment.

It seems to me that 1. and 2. could simply start by an analysis of current
deployed solutions; trying to exhaustively cover the possible situations
that could be a representative subset of real scenarios, to provide some
"howto" is an endless task, and would take so long, that it would probably
not make much sense in the end...also, different ISPs not only have
different sizes, use different technologies, but also have different
purposes in terms of offered services; and, we also have commercial
services and research services...

So, as was also mentioned yesterday at the v6ops meeting, why not simply
change the document to provide an analysis of current scenarios? I'm
pretty sure that it doesn't cost much to some ISPs of different sizes to
provide some input on a draft that somebody could put together...

Ch.,
rute

---

From: Jasminko Mulahusic <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:15:52 +0200 (CEST)

> services and research services...

true. the thing is that we are not sure if there are any isps that have
deployed fully commercial v6 networks, operated in the same way as their
v4 networks. and even if we could find them it is not sure they would be
able to share the results with us.

jasminko

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:23:36 +0100

> able to share the results with us.

The main production deployments now are in the research networks, which have
to be commercial quality, but may not offer all the types of services that
commercial ISPs do.

But v6 is running dual stack in Abilene, GEANT, many European NRENs and
the transatlantic link(s) dual-stack without v6 breaking v4.

But there are many gaps.  Projects such as 6NET are trying to document and
where possible work on these (www.6net.org/publications).

Tim

---

From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:40:15 +0200

And Euro6IX (www.euro6ix.org) is working in the commercial side ;-)

Also, there is a lot of commercial deployment in Japan.

Regards,
Jordi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Chown" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: comment on draft-lind-v6ops-isp-scenarios-00.txt

> where possible work on these (www.6net.org/publications).

*****************************
Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
Presentations and videos on-line at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

---

From: HELENA RUTE SOFIA <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:51:08 -0400 (EDT)

> able to share the results with us.

Actually, there is such input. it's just a question of asking :-)
(NTT/Verio in the USA, for instance; I believe NTT
in europe also).
I cannot help in terms of commercial services, given that FCCN only
provides non-commercial services. But, even ISPs such as FCCN can gladly
provide input.

Please notice that part of this effor has already been done earlier,
either in the now extinct 6bone, or in some other projects related to v6.
It's just a matter of asking. An analysis is certainly more feasible than
a document trying to cover howtos for different ISPs...

Rute

---

From: Jasminko Mulahusic <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:08:31 +0200 (CEST)

> (NTT/Verio in the USA, for instance; I believe NTT

i guess this is something for the isp design team to figure out where and
which questions to ask.

it was asked yesterday in the v6ops meeting and ti looks like, of the isps
present yesterday,  ntt/verio are the only one that have done it on the
scale that is interesting for this exercise. though, it was not clear how
much they will be able to share with us.

other isps that have done it are welcomed to step forward.

jasminko

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:22:20 +0300 (EEST)

> other isps that have done it are welcomed to step forward.

What I'd like to see is that people forget this "academic networks are not 
ISPs" model.

Academic networks might not have certain drawbacks ISPs have, but there
are enough similarities in the core network, network management, support
infrastructure, etc. and to some degree, customer access interface to see
that looking at the both are useful, and should not be excluded.

However, there are at least several aspects to ISPs, however, which are
typically not present in academic networks: *typically*, these become
prevalent in the ISPs with DSL/cable/modem etc. access directly to the
large number of customers (not big networks such as universities
themselves).

I think the *easiest* thing is to *first* work on issues which apply to
both academic networks and ISPs, i.e. the ISP backbones, network
management etc.  Of course, other efforts are also welcome if there is
enough energy and interest for them.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

---

From: Shin Miyakawa <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 18:35:28 +0900 (JST)

I think that I should make some comments on it ... ;-)

> much they will be able to share with us.

First of all, we do not think that we are the only one ;-)  but anyway...

yes, as I said yesterday, we are glad to make comments on the documents
and finishing PD requirement draft ;-), 
I am ready to contribute to the document.

I think that we can not disclose entire our experiences, design policy 
and implementation because we think that should be company secrets,
but at the same time, we think that some part of information and
technology should be shared by all of the world.

# For example, we have already published our ADSL service spec as 
# http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shirasaki-dualstack-service-01.txt

Best regards,

Shin Miyakawa, Ph.D
NTT Communications / WIDE Project
E-mail:[email-masked] / [email-masked]

---

From: Carlos Friacas <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:01:56 +0100 (WEST)

> And Euro6IX (www.euro6ix.org) is working in the commercial side ;-)

Can you please point me out where i can read that *exactly* on the site?

I cannot find that "commercial side" on the objectives or on the work
plan.

Thanks in advance.

> > where possible work on these (www.6net.org/publications).

./Carlos                                                "Networking is fun!"
--------------         [http://www.ip6.fccn.pt]           http://www.fccn.pt
<[email-masked]>, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN, Wide Area Network Workgroup
F.C.C.N. - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional fax:+351 218472167
                [ See me @ h323:videoconf05.fccn.pt]
  "Internet is just routes (125953/461), naming (millions) and... people!"

---

From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:12:43 +0200

Well ... look who are the partners.

Anyway, you've the info in the home page, and in the objectives section pointed out by that page ...

Regards,
Jordi

---

From: Gert Doering <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:19:24 +0200

Hi,

> And Euro6IX (www.euro6ix.org) is working in the commercial side ;-)

Isn't Euro6IX the EU-research-money fundet project that doesn't permit
connection of any commercial network?

Anyway - besides the research projects, there are already a number of
commercial ISPs in Europe that struggle with implementing a commercial-
grade IPv6 service.  

The problems encountered are what you'd expect - hardware vendor support, 
upstream ISPs that do not support IPv6, NOC people training, etc.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  55442  (55636)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: [email-masked]
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299

---

From: "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:28:38 +0200

A R&D funded project can never be involved in commercial transit, that's clear.

But we have several ISPs working with the project, and connected to it, that "use" the project to build their networks before going
into commercial, and they can also have trial users (if they aren't charge for the service).

Regards,
Jordi

---

From: "Rute C. Sofia" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:25:59 -0400 (EDT)

Pekka,

> that looking at the both are useful, and should not be excluded.

excelent point...

my 2-cents on this: instead of asking people (read ISPs here...) to come
forward and speak about what they've done, why not simply try to summarise
the aspects that would be interesting to analyse and then, simply send
that list to the mailing-list. This would work as a form, which
then might give rise to an analysis, or to a set of scenarios
that could be covered (again, simply in terms of analysis of what
peoplare are currently doing, and not as a howto).
Possibly, an initial list wouldn't address
issues such as policies that can't be disclosed (thinking in commercial
terms), or other issues that might be a bit controverse. And, this would
also possibly add some interest in something that is still too vague...

rute

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 15:57:01 +0200

> A R&D funded project can never be involved in commercial transit, that's

uh, this is patently not the case in some stateside r&e funded networks

randy