Subject: (IPng 7201) IPv6 Deployment Meeting Grenoble Final Minutes

From: Jim Bound <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 13:02:56 -0500

IPv6 Deployment meeting
IMAG, Grenoble, France
February 4, 1999

Integrated Notes as taken by Jack McCann, Tony Hain, and Yanick
Pouffary.  The chair of this meeting (Jim Bound) expresses extreme
thanks to these folks for taking these minutes.

For agenda items where we "Ran out of Time" below we can discuss on the
IPv6 Deployment List as a set of additional  "action items" from the
meeting and if we meet at IETF 44 in Minneapolis.  Other action items
from the meeting are listed at the end of these minutes.

- - Agenda review 

- --------------------------------------------------
  The purpose of this day will be to review current deployment 
  activities, potential additional efforts, and opportunities for 
  educating and influencing developers, ISPs, network managers, and 
  users. 

  Dicussion Questions:
  Why would anyone run IPv6 Now? (see ipng/ngtrans minutes too)
  Why would anyone ever run IPv6? (see ipng/ngtrans minutes too)
  Applicable to both questions above:
     - Plug and Play 
     - Deadline (similar to Y2K issue) the YV4 issue.  No addresses
       left.
     - Application Reqs to have Global Addresses
     - Renumbering and multihoming site for robustness
     - Ease of management: Routing Efficiency, Lower cost of routing
       complexity, hidden cost of private addresses on the network
       and firewalls.
     - End to End IPsec out of the box.
     - Extensibility of the IPv6 Protocol via Extension Headers
       so the protocol can adapt and evolve for tomorrows business
       needs.
     - New applications which take advantage of flow-label and 
       Mobile IPv6.
     - NAT is not a long term solution.
     - IPv4 addresses space is limited.
     - IPv6 is more scalable and could perform better
     - IPsec is mandatory and required for all Hosts.
  Who will deploy IPv6 first?
     - Research Community, Educational, and Commodity Markets which
       will drive ISPs.
     - New devices like IEEE Sensornet, NCs, Embedded Systems which
       converge and IPv4 addresses are old solution.
     - Large organizations with not enough IPv4 addresses who need
       end-to-end IPsec and Mobility.              
     - Those who can benefit from IPv6 new features like VOIP, Mobile,
       Security, and Plug-and-Play.
     - Europe and Asia ISP/Telcos will deploy first, U.S. will lag.
       But this is not like OSI with completely different variants 
       because these two markets never had enough IPv4 address to 
       begin with.
     - 3rd world markets who are just starting Internet connectivity.
    - by geography or market sector? -> market sector
    - research community
      - good research projects
      - this is another reason why anyone would deploy now
    - manufacturers (e.g. auto), retail (every aisle is a
      subnet), banks
    - these sound like people with complete administrative
      control of environment
    - anyone thinking about deploying large numbers of
      devices in new efforts; don't have to interact with existing
      legacy applications because not general purpose computers
    - multicast IETF sessions over IPv6 (IETF people
      are early adopters)
    - need public domain code
  Will the Internet Lead Corporate Networks or follow as IPv6 is 
  deployed?  
     - Most input that corporate networks will lead in the U.S. and
       ISPs in most cases will follow.  But in Europe, Asia, and 
       elsewhere ISPs will lead and at least equal corporate 
       deployment.
  How to get ISPs to deploy IPv6?
     -  Most important vendors must ship IPv6 products.
     -  Work like 6REN/Internet2/6TAP/WIDE Japan will cause ISPs to
        begin adoption.
     -  Large corporate customers seeking IPv6 connectivity across
        the V4 Oceans.  Even with Tunnels Native IPv6 is needed.
     -  Network Management parts must be supported by IPv6.
     -  Tools to tune the IPv6 Network will be needed.
     -  IPv6 router renumbering and multihoming more solidified 
        because as ISPs can use the plug and play to renumber 
        subscribers with IPv6 will be a plus which cannot be done
        with IPv4.
     -  It is cheaper to run IPv6 than IPv4.
     -  New market segments can be attained by IPv6.
     -  Competitive pressure from other ISPs taking subsribers
        especially in the U.S. as the ISPs feel pressure from 
        Worldwide long haul ISP providers/carriers.
     -  Supporting new technology markets that want IPv6 for the 
        address space: Mobility, VOIP, Cell Phones, Network
        Appliances (the Internet Car, the Internet Refridgerator)
     -  Cable companies support new IPv6 Multicast model.

See discussion below for these and you can locate the presentations at:
ftp://ftp.ipv6.org/pub/meetings/grenoble99/
- ----------------------------------------------------------
  Bob Fink - 6REN and 6TAP
  Jim Bound - The Palo Alto Gateway and IPv6 and sub-TLA Request Strategy
  Marc Blanchet - IPv6 Deployment Issues
  Henk Steenman - Amsterdam Internet Exchange (AMS-IX) native IPv6 environment
  Jim Bound for Perry Metzger - Status of the V6 Deployment List Activities
  Jun Murai - IPv6 Deployment in Japan
  Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino - IPv6 verification technologies and open 
                             result by FREE see:
                             http://www.tahi.org/
  Latif LADID - Influencing IPv6 Developers and Promotion
  Kenji OTA - IETF Terminal Room Experiences with IPv6
  Dale Finkelson - Internet2 and IPv6 Deployment

  Status of ipv6.org work

  Public Domain Code Discussion: (Ran out of Time)
   Appached Web Server
   Browser Client
   Sendmail
   BIND/DNS
   BSD Network Utilities
   Transition Mechanisms

  Review IPv6 Initial deployment implementation requirements (Ran out of
                                                              Time).
  WINsock API consortia work on IPv6 status?
  QOS and Flowlabel Support for IPv6?  (Ran out of Time)
  Mobile and IPv6 Deployement?  (Ran out of Time)
  IP Future Conference for 1998.
  Why would CTO not want to deploy IPv6? (Ran out of Time)
- ---------------------------------------------

- - Presentation: Native IPv6 on AMS-IX (Henk Steenman)
  - participants: Surfnet, AT&T Netherlands, UUnet, Dutch research network
  - experiment was successful
  - recommendation for IPv6 deployment to AMS-IX
  - IX as address space provider requires change in business model

With multiple ISP's in Amsterdam using tunnels to interconnect it made
sense to think about how to do native interconnect
Test environment was VLAN; routing protocol BGP4+ in full mesh
Testing 2 addressing models; 6bone pTLA, & pNLA
NLA announced to 6bone via UUnet & AT&T.
Within the single vendor environment there were not any problems.
The model of single NLA worked.
Will propose to extend the native Ipv6 environment to pre-production
Will coordinate with other exchanges

- - Presentation: 6REN (Bob Fink)
  - RENs deploying native IPv6:
    - AARNET (Australia)
    - CERNET (China)
      - 1,075 universities; 36,000 high schools; 160,000 elementary schools

Attempt to kick-start IPv6 production deployments
October 98 initiated peering between research and education networks
6ren is a coordination effort, not a network. NANOG style
QWEST will provide registry services
ESnet will provide transit between production peering points and the 
6bone if necessary
Talks with content-level networks to develop plans for production IPv6
service
Internet surveyors will change to use IPv6 as transport for collecting
IPv4 data.
Web site 6ren.net
6tap cross connect at StarTAP
project of ESnet and Canarie 
goal is to provide a large scale interconnect
registry & route server colocated with 6tap router at StarTAP
early deployment provides opportunity to influence quality and service
levels
ESnet will provide operational monitoring
Canarie will provide route server functions
Provides single point of measurement to allow early analysis of usage
Single-point-of-failure is minimal issue since the StarTAP is a single
switch
Plan to deploy production 'allocated' addresses.
This does not effect 6bone
Initial connection to StarTAP is ATM, but other locations may provide
various technologies
vBNS will also provide transit
MCI is providing commercial services

- - Presentation: 6TAP (Bob Fink)
  - StarTAP exchange in Chicago has ATM links to Europe and Asia
  - will colocate IPv6 router and server and provide native IPv6
    over ATM PVCs starting in Spring 1999 (coinciding with availability
    of real IPv6 addresses)
  - www.6ren.net/6tap

6tap cross connect at StarTAP
goal is to provide a large scale interconnect
registry & route server colocated with 6tap router at StarTAP
early deployment provides opportunity to influence quality and service
levels
ESnet will provide operational monitoring
Provides single point of measurement to allow early analysis of usage
Single-point-of-failure is minimal issue since the StarTAP is a single
switch
Plan to deploy production 'allocated' addresses.
This does not effect 6bone
Initial connection to StarTAP is ATM, but other locations may provide
various technologies
vBNS will also provide transit
MCI is providing commercial services

- - Presentation: Compaq IPv6 Analysis of sub-TLA request (Jim Bound)

Slide with commercial IX's in US
Inter-IX communication slide
Compaq provides Palo Alto Internet Exchange which is separate from Palo
Alto Gateway as native IPv6 exchange
Showed 6bone Hub connect to Tunnels and non-Listed Native IPv6
connections.
Considering a request for sub-TLA and peering with 6REN.

- - Presentation: Tunnel server (Marc Blanchet)
  - another tunnel server
  - www.freenet6.net
  - points out scaling issue, how many tunnels per node? 64K?
  - needs https (secure http so user can authenticate server)
  - maybe merge with Alain Durand's tunnel broker effort

Plug-n-play using IPv4 as link technology:
freenet6.net as website with pointers to most implementations
independent implementation like IMAG sign-up, tunnel server

- - Presentation: Internet2 IPv6 Backbone issues (Dale Finkelson)
  - www.vbns.net/presentations/IPv6_plans
  - "Abilene"
    - can't run native IPv6 because net is all IP over PPP over SONET,
      links all connected to cisco 12000(?) routers, IPv6 stack not
      available for this equipment (at least not one Abilene feels it
      can trust)
    - you can buy native IPv6 connection to "NGS" network from MCI/Worldcom
  - make it simple for users to install and use
  - researchers want to take measurements, make tools available,
    make it easy to instrument

Internet 2  Goals - deploying a testbed for researchers, and
understanding
the role of IPpv6.
Native IPv6 on mesh of ATM pvc connected routers.
Abilene  Goals - IP over Sonet at OC3, 12, & 48 for University research
Qwest provided pops to minimize local loop costs
There may be fiber for additional private networks
NGnet from MCI provides native commercial IPv6
Make it simple & instrument heavily.

- - Presentation: IPv6: Unneeded, unwanted, unlikely (Jun Murai)
  - www.wide.ad.jp/10th
  - slides by Paul Francis (NTT) for WIDE 10th anniversary symposium
  - takes devil's advocate view

- - Presentation: IPv6 Deployment in Asia/Japan (Jun Murai)
  - Panasonic developing IPv6 internet fax machine
    - 40,000,000 fax machines
  - "Internet car"
    - 1,000,000,000 cars by 2010
  - "Internet refridgerator"
  - "C'est Bone" (IPv6 backbone) project
  - KAME has done mozilla6, sendmail6, ssh6, apache6
    and submitted patches back to developers
  - Japanese government contributing $3 million to WIDE, $7-8 million
    to vendors for IPv6 development
  - Asian networks (APAN, APII, AII) encouraging IPv6 R&D activities

WIDE working on R&D, and testbed
Discussions with government
Addressing need for IPv6 to children (non-technical arguments also carry
with CEO's & Gov.
Collecting various devs into KEIO funded by government to create kame
Mobile IPv6 in a car with GPS as research project (expect all cars to
eventually be on Internet)
Need for 1Billion cars to have an address
Internet refrigerator shown as example of potential devices
TAHI project evaluating kame implementations
Goal - reference implementation
Available from ftp.kame.net <ftp://ftp.kame.net>
250 people in WIDE camp with laptops working 20hrs/day on a variety of
areas
APAN provides native IPv6 for Asian region

- - Presentation: "6REN Bestseller: IPv6" (Latif Ladid)
  - banking sector may be first adopters of IPv6 due to mandated security;
    also government/military for classified data (again due to security)
  - need sense of urgency for IPv6 deployment
  - "nobody knows about IPv6"

Marketing oriented discussions
Nothing happens overnight
Historical perspective, all new technologies take 20 years
After 125 years telephone only reaches 12% of world population
What is wrong with v6, it is not a US issue
Its engineering driven rather than market driven
Mindset is free, ATM forum is backed by money and that results in a
driver
CIDR & NAT killed the urgency
No IPv6 specific applications
No promotion money - creates the best kept secret in the world
Success legacy
Standard exists; may be overkilled; usual model is ship first and fix
later
Field trials show it works
It is the Y2K problem for the Internet
Provide the real thing, not CIDR + NAT
Message to banking sector that security is mandated
IPv4 Internet supports only non-classified data; basically advertising
and
non-value data
Make the big bang happen
The message has to be different - make it aggressive and set a hard
limit
Need compliance and certification
Create a 'fellow program' samuri's of the new Internet; build a global
team to evangelize
Create a 'logo' program
Conferences & Road Shows

- - Presentation: TAHI Project - toward IPv6 verification technologies
  (Nobuo Okabe and Jun-ichiro Hagino)
  - www.tahi.org
  - one goal is set of publically available tests

- - Presentation: IPv6 in IETF-43 terminal room (Kenji Ota)
  - tunnel to NTTv6net, NTT IPv6 test bed

- - Presentation: Report on IP Future conference (Alain Durand)
  - 3 day conference in Paris in December 1998
  - approximately 100 participants, audience from all over Europe
  - 2 days devoted to IPv6, 1 day to other topics
  - feeling is IPv6 may not start in U.S., U.S. has more addresses,
    IPv6 will start in Europe or Asia
  - planning another conference for December 1999 in Paris

- - Other Discussions

  - will IPv6 be first in corporate networks or in Internet backbone?
    - Jim Bound: may depend on where you are
    - Bob Hinden: U.S. ISPs are under profit pressure, can't take longer
      term view; ISPs elsewhere might have different business model
      (e.g. government funded) that allows longer term view

  - Jim Bound read list of items handed in by attendees (Jim has list)
    - Jim Bound: again points out that mandatory security is wanted
      by some customers
    - Steve Deering: will corporations open firewalls to IPsec?
    - Erik Nordmark: some sites may want central control of security policy
    - Jim Bound: met with U.S. ISPs in October 1996 to discuss what was
      their concern with IPv6?  They said "you need to ship it".
    - someone: how to get HDTV to deploy with IPv6?
    - Jim Bound: step toward this by having "IPv6 readiness" in IETF specs
    - Jim Bound: look at HDTV as potential target market; have them
      deploy with IPv6
    - Yanick Pouffary: don't miss HDTV deployment the way we missed
      mobile phone deployment

  - Deployment work issues
    - status of ipv6.org, mailing lists, web server
      - Perry Metzger has web site, mail list set up
      - should it be an open mailing list?
        - Jim thinks yes, but Marc Blanchet points out Perry questioned
          request to join list from one of Marc's colleagues
      - should have two lists, help list open to public, closed (or less
        open) list for workers
    - Alain Durand: will ipv6.org have IPv6 stack? -> yes
    - Alain Durand: should also have IPv6 for other IPv6 related web
      sites (e.g. sunroof.eng.sun.com)

  - Public domain code discussion
    - KAME/INRIA/NRL merge status? they are reviewing each others code
    - Jim Bound: must be careful about what we call "public domain" code;
      make sure it really is free to use/redistribute
    - Francis Dupont: INRIA code has BSD license, KAME is the same, this
      should be good enough
    - Peter Curran: need binary distribution, not source; make it easier
      for someone to install
    - someone: there will be a new version of merged KAME/INRIA/NRL code this
      summer with IPv6 and IPsec for FreeBSD
    - Alain Durand: INRIA license is in separate file so you don't have
      to look at code to read license
    - Alain Durand: goal is to have KAME/INRIA/NRL merge go into main
      FreeBSD release
    - Marc Blanchet: has script for automatic install of FreeBSD
    - Jun Murai: World Trade Organization defining import/export process
      for software, maybe we should tell them what we want to do with
      IPv6 to influence them
    - Itohjun: can do IPv4 <-> IPv6 web proxy with Apache; squid not
      available for IPv6, hard port, using 'int' to hold IP address;
    - someone: someone has agreed to port squid

  - What transition mechanisms should we implement first?
    - Jim Bound: 6over4, AIIH; not SIIT or NAT-PT or SOCKS initially
      like the first year, then we will need the rest .
    - Itohjun: would prefer to avoid tunnels (automatic) including
      6over4 due to difficulty diagnosing problems
    - Erik Nordmark: maybe need ability to remotely invoke traceroute
      on a tunnel?
    - Jim Bound: need to quickly define set of transition mechanisms
      needed later this year for deployment

  - Winsock consortium
    - Jim Bound: windows is important, what is this issue?
    - Rich Draves: some winsock header files have bogus IPv6 definitions
      - Rich took action to look into this

  - Should we meet at IETF 44? -> yes

  - meeting adjourned

Action Items:

  - Develop two papers:
      What the Internet will be without IPv6.
      Why someone should deploy IPv6.
  - Get IETF to use IPv6 Multicast as feed.
  - Look for emerging HDTV and Cable businesses to look at IPv6.
  - Get all IPv6 related Web Sites to use IPv6.
  - Contact World Trade Organization and get them to adopt IPv6.
  - Complete discussion items we ran out of time one.
  - Followup on WINSOCK API efforts needed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Pete Loshin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 10:52:21 -0500

First off, please pardon the cross-posting but I wanted to make sure I
reach everyone in the IPv6 community.

I've been approached by an editor at Data Communications magazine to
write an article about the state of the art of IPv6 implementations.
This is an opportunity to advance the story in the media from "What is
IPv6?" to "What tools are available that will help my company deploy
IPv6?"

It's not about what IPv6 is, but rather, what can corporate technology
consumers start doing about it.

This means I've got to round up information about products that support
IPv6, right now. This will also mean coming up with information about
products that are due to be offered real soon. The IPv6.org site has a
list of implementations, but I know it's not 100% comprehensive or
current.

So, if you use an IPv6 product, tell me about it. If you're building an
IPv6 product, tell me about it. Even if you've only heard of an IPv6
product, tell me about it. Tell me about these software and hardware
products, even if that means just sending a one-line email pointing me
to a company and a product (and hopefully a contact person who can tell
me more).

When I've got a comprehensive product listing (vendors, URLs, product
info) I will turn it over for the IPv6.org site as well as incorporate
it into the article. And any other appropriate information that I
generate from doing the article as well.

If you can help in any way, I truly appreciate it--and I truly believe
this will benefit the IPv6 community.

warm regards,
-pl

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Pete Loshin         <[email-masked]>       +1 781/646-6318 |
|                                                             |
| _IPv6 Clearly Explained_ Morgan Kaufmann 1999               |
| _TCP/IP Clearly Explained_ 3rd ed Morgan Kaufmann June 1999 |
|                                                             |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Pete Loshin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 16:50:56 -0500

OK, sorry to bother everyone, again, with this--but it is a real
opportunity to get the trade press to start doing substantive IPv6
coverage and move beyond the "What is IPv6?" stage.

The editor from Data Communications just told me the focus of this
article has changed from a "what vendors are doing about IPv6" to an
IPv6 migration story. That means giving a technical overview--as well as
technical specifics--to what is necessary for an organization to migrate
to IPv6. From an architectural discussion of the options for transition,
to a discussion of the technical objectives, what issues need to be
considered, how do you plan for the change, what happens when you
convert a system/network.

It also means some discussion of the relative merits of putting IPv6 on
production systems and on different platforms. It also means providing
some resources relating to IPv6 (e.g., 6bone, where to get addresses,
vendors, organizations). It also means treating the business case for
IPv6 (benefits and costs). It also means coming up with some kind of
management decision tree that shows what needs to be done/what
objectives can be met with the transition.

Why am I coming to the list? Because I need to determine where I can get
answers to some of the hard questions raised here, and to see whether
there are people involved with the IPv6 standards process, with 6bone,
with vendors, and with organizations actually deploying IPv6, who can
make themselves available to provide answers to these questions for the
readers of Data Communications. Unfortunately, my time is quite limited,
so I won't be able to do this unless I feel comfortable that I can find
all the answers relatively quickly--and I think it is important to do.

So: if you know the answers to any of these questions--that is, if you
are an "authority" on deploying IPv6--if you've done it for your
organization, or if you're planning to do it for your
organization--contact me by e-mail. This is an opportunity to get the
IPv6 transition message across to a broad technical audience. With
attribution if you want the publicity, but also without attribution if
you prefer anonymity.

Please let me know, by email, if you can help out or if you can point me
to any resources. As I mentioned before, this is a good opportunity to
start getting people to think in terms of implementing IPv6, not just
thinking about it.

warm regards,
-pl