Subject: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

From: Damien Mascré <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:12:47 +0100

Hello,

I am lost, there is IPv4, IPv6 and IPv8/16...

I know about all of them except IPv8/16 ... is it a standard, a kind of
proposed draft ??

Is it used ??
Since many time ??

Thanks in advance,

Damien.

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 15:28:22 -0600

You can use "IPv8 Addressing".....with IPv6....
Address blocks are free to Address Space Managers (ASMs)

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Damien Mascré 
  To: [email-masked] 
  Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 3:12 PM
  Subject: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

  Hello,

  I know about all of them except IPv8/16 ... is it a standard, a kind of proposed draft ??

  Is it used ??
  Since many time ??

  Thanks in advance,

  Damien.

---

From: Damien Mascré <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 00:20:06 +0100

Hi jim, it is me again...

I have written an IPv6 crash course for my school final exam.
Two months later, I wanted to update my knowledge about that...
And I should precise that I was not lost on the subject...

but I was stucked when using google I was reading your
"IPv6 Privacy Concern" and starting laughing out loud
when I started to realize that it was totally crazy that
someone could deduce who was behind my screen
by just looking my IPv6 address...

But as you are claiming everywhere that IPv8/IPv16 could
solve the problem... I have had a doubt... Your reply
has cleared that point !
I conceed that your vision of galaxy is pretty cool and
that this idea can be re-used in a science fiction book,
but I think that NATs, proxies, and other adressing tricks
used by IPv4 are nothing compared to the difficulty of
setting up IPv8-routed networks.

I think too that "changing" the IPv4 header is uncool and not clean....

Notice that MAC addresses are used in link/site local addresses
that are not supposed to be routed...
(draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-06)

Notice too that administrators that are aware of security concerns
will not always allow MAC addresses to be used publicly.... since
IP can be fixed or set up by DHCP servers...

After reflexion, the last sentence is silly.......
After all... what can you do with my MAC address ??
Sue me for having visiting your web site ??

Where is the privacy problem ??
I have many people using my computer... even if someone
does bad things with my MAC address, how can you be sure it was me
and not someone else ??

I have red many of the replies you have written on this list...
and I am not sure you have always correctly answered to the people...
They need a solution to implement an IPv6 solutions or understand
why it is sometimes better to keep either IPv4 or v6 ...
but your replies are almost always... "use IPv8".....

I think you should stop confusing people and start considering IPv6
as a clean solution to forget IPv4 tricks..... by not setting up a hack like
IPvX.

Damien.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Jim Fleming [mailto:[email-masked]]
Envoyé : dimanche 18 novembre 2001 00:18
À : Damien Mascré
Objet : Re: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

Surely there must be a TLD here for you...

http://www.dot-biz.com/INFO/ROOT/
3:215 BALLOON
3:216 SVK (SLOVAKIA-(Slovak-Republic))
3:217 DNK (DENMARK)
3:218 GRC (GREECE)
3:219 INFO
3:220 PUNK
3:221 SVN (SLOVENIA)
3:222 FLAT
3:223 STOCKHOLM

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]De la part de Jim Fleming
Envoyé : samedi 17 novembre 2001 22:28
À : Damien Mascré; [email-masked]
Objet : Re: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Damien Mascré
  To: [email-masked]
  Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 3:12 PM
  Subject: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

  Hello,

  Is it used ??
  Since many time ??

  Thanks in advance,

  Damien.

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2001 22:35:28 -0600

You might want to study "The IPv6 Privacy Problem".
http://www.google.com/search?q=IPV6+Privacy+Problem

"IPv8 Addressing" solves that problem..."IPv8 Addressing in IPv6 Headers"

"IPv8 Addressing" with 128-bit IPv6 is [64 bits Site-ID][64 bits IPv8 Address]

[64 bits Site-ID]....2002:[IPv4]:0000
For...[64 bits IPv8 Address]...see http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif

As for what people can do with your MAC address, there have been many
examples cited. One of the best, in my opinion, documented by one of the
Harvard law professors was his realization that he could buy a cheap lap-top
from someone, get on the NGI, and be viewed by web-site operators as the
previous owner, with all their profiles and habits tracked. Other people are
concerned that the MAC address can essentially describe the make and model
of the equipment, so web-site operators could start treating people different
depending on how much money they spent on their system, or when they
bought it. Novice Internet users might also be freaked out when some web
pop-up says, "Hello, how do you like your new Compact Impressio, purchased
in May at Better-Buy, is it performing as expected ?"....please call 976-555-1212
for information on the recall on that equipment. Naive users may say, "Wow,
how do they know what I have ?....I better call...."....and may enter a long and
winding road similar to....http://www.MajesticTheGame.com

OK, so now people have more brilliant ideas, as a fix, they want to embed
your children's home telephone number in the right-most 64-bits....wonderful....
Since you are taking your "final exam", you may not have children, and say "so what".
Well, sorry, some people find that IETF proposal more absurd than the IETF
MAC address proposal...

Getting down to the bits, others claim..."just put a random number in the right 64-bits".
OK, now you have made that field largely useless for routing, which was also the
case with the MAC-derived address. With the right 64-bits dead or random, you
have now reduced the IPv6 128-bit address field to 64 useful routing bits, and the
dominant transition routing plan calls for 2002:[IPv4]:0000 in the left 64-bits. That
deeds most of the useful, routable, IPv6 space to existing IPv4 owners (which they
of course like...see Fairness below....)...and it leaves the 16-bits of 0000 which may
be useful for them to manage at their site. With that, you have now expanded the
existing users address space by 16-bits. Some people do not find that to be enough,
especially those that want to be able to specify the 16-bit Port in their DNS AAAA
entry, which was never possible in the 32-bit DNS A records.

In summary, IPv6 is being boiled down, and transitioned in so many different ways,
that the term IPv6, ceases to have meaning. People seem to want to select all of the
features they like from different transition plans and lump them together and claim
that is the IPv6 they are talking about. In doing that, it becomes a big game, sort of
like the childrens game with the hammer and the little moles that pop up. It becomes
a never ending game of trying to pin people down to precisely what they mean. When
people finally sit down and draw a picture or try to make it all work, they realize the
mess they have. The IPv6 advocates of course wave their hands and say, don't
worry about all that, some vaporware routing daemon will manage your entire net
for you, you will not have to touch a thing. This of course gets the attention of the
clueless ISP owner who just wants to turn equipment on and sell packet transport
to paying customers.

None of this of course addresses the efficiency issues, and the fact that people are
going to be carrying 64 bits of personal ID or random number around TWICE in
each packet. Again, the hand-wavers will tell you that is not a problem because they
have another vaporware solution that will compress the bloated IPv6 header to
almost nothing. It will interesting to see how that turns out, especially with the
2002:[IPv4]:0000 prefix triggering an IPv4 header encapsulation. One could claim
that is not IPv6, but really IPv4, with a header extension. Plans like that were rejected
as not what the infamous "community" wanted [community being the dozen usual suspects].

As for being difficult to set-up, yes, clearly the people who do not support
"IPv8 Addressing in IPv6 Headers" are not going to make it easy to set-up.
Windows XP out of the box, builds the IPv6 addresses with the MAC address.
Either a bug or a "feature" makes it hard to change that. That is up to Microsoft
to fix. Microsoft clearly wants to only encourage one system to be used with the
6to4cfg utility setting up the GateKeeper, with 2002:[IPv4]::[IPv4], that again plays
well with the existing IPv4 owners, but does not do much for people who are tired
of the unfair IPv4 allocation policies and absurd taxes paid for someone keeping
a database of allocations. $25,000 for a block of IPv6 addresses ?....get real...

It all boils down to fairness.
Which list do you think is more fair ?
The "toy" IPv4 Internet Early Experimentation Allocations ?
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space
or
The Proof-of-Concept IPv8 Allocations ?
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt

Why would people pay for Address Space, when it is FREE ?
http://www.in-addr.info
3:219 INFO

[email-masked]
http://www.unir.com
http://www.unir.com/images/architech.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/headers.gif
http://www.unir.com/images/address.gif
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt
http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12223.html

----- Original Message -----
From: Damien Mascré
To: [email-masked]
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 5:20 PM
Subject: (ngtrans) To Jim Fleming

Damien.

-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]De la part de Jim Fleming
Envoyé : samedi 17 novembre 2001 22:28
À : Damien Mascré; [email-masked]
Objet : Re: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

----- Original Message -----
From: Damien Mascré
To: [email-masked]
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2001 3:12 PM
Subject: (ngtrans) lost about IPvX

Hello,

Is it used ??
Since many time ??

Thanks in advance,

Damien.

---

From: Tom Lohdan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 18:47:08 +1100

Jim,

Your a nutcase, your values are worthwhile on IPv6, but your constant push 
on IPv8 are short of needing a doctor.

Your website describes nothing on IPv8, it only points people to a search 
engine. Either you have no idea what your are talking about, or you are 
just not bothered to complete your case for IPv8 and are telling people to 
search themselves.

The 2002:<ipv4>:: address space will solve nothing at all, your ideals on a 
"cost nothing" approach will live as far the nearest IPO and will last as 
long them too. 2002 is not the end and be all of IPv6 address space.

.Biz is the only reason you are pushing IPv8, look at your website and the 
number of links to Biz information. There is nothing creditable about your 
push to IPv8, apart from money promoting it as a .Biz venture, Note the 
number of banner advertisements.

Cease and decease with your fantasy about IPv8, unless you wish to provide 
the information on your website without referring people to a search engine.

Thanks,
Tom

>setting up IPv8-routed networks.

IPv6 News & Links
http://hs247.com

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:15:01 -0600

> long them too. 2002 is not the end and be all of IPv6 address space.

2002:[IPv4]:0000/64 is used to construct the IPv8 Cloud on top of the IPv4 Transport.

The IPv16 network is for serious people...powered by C@t....

http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

Jim Fleming
http://www.ddj.com/articles/search/search.cgi?q=fleming
Oct93: The C+@ Programming Language

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 02:28:11 -0600

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Lohdan" <[email-masked]>
> http://hs247.com
November 16th 2001 - pTLA 3FFE:82B0::/28 allocated to WEBONLINE-NET 
WEBONLINE-NET has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:82B0::/28 having finished its 2-week review period - whois 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
November 15th 2001 - pTLA 3FFE:82A0::/28 allocated to INTERNET-MULTIFEED 
INTERNET-MULTIFEED has been allocated pTLA 3FFE:82A0::/28 having finished its 2-week review period - whois 
-----

What do IPv6 3FFE blocks cost these days ?

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

---

From: Tom Lohdan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:19:51 +1100

At 10:35 PM 17/11/2001 -0600, Jim Fleming wrote:
>previous owner, with all their profiles and habits tracked.

No difference to cookies or spy-ware, which exist in todays IPv4 format, 
and exist in IPv"whatever" in the future.

>  Other people are
>bought it.

Irrelevant. A NIC can work under multiple OS's, and could have it installed 
in a 386. The Website owner knows nothing but the type of NIC you have.

>Novice Internet users might also be freaked out when some web

Scare tactic's, seen many times by people pushing a cause for monetary reasons.

>Well, sorry, some people find that IETF proposal more absurd than the IETF

Unplug yourself from the Internet if you wish to remain private, there are 
things such as Proxies and SecureNAT's which will protect your information 
and are available today under IPv4.

>Getting down to the bits, others claim..."just put a random number in the 

Yes so DDoS people can not be traced.

>dominant transition routing plan calls for 2002:[IPv4]:0000 in the left 
>64-bits.

2002 is not the end of IPv6 address space.

>That deeds most of the useful, routable, IPv6 space to existing IPv4 
>owners (which they

Irrelevant. You are telling people what to do with the address space they 
have been allocated. Chances of people following that plan, unlikely unless 
it is made part of their uplink requirements.

>that the term IPv6, ceases to have meaning.

IPv6 has always had meaning, more than your fictitious IPv8 becoming FACT.

>People seem to want to select all of the
>like the childrens game with the hammer and the little moles that pop up.

If it was up to the children we would still be using IPX, Irrelevant yet again.

>It becomes a never ending game of trying to pin people down to precisely 
>what they mean. When
>mess they have.

How many IPv4 existing Networks are a mess already? and it is not due to 
the address space. Irrelevant, yet again.

>The IPv6 advocates of course wave their hands and say, don't

Actually, you are trying to sell IPv8 to the "so called Clueless" be 
careful you call a clueless ISP owner.

>almost nothing.

Cookies will kill your privacy in a second. Irrelevant, yet again.

>It will interesting to see how that turns out, especially with the

2002:: is not the end of IPv6 address space, Irrelevant, yet again.

>a database of allocations. $25,000 for a block of IPv6 addresses ?....get 

IP address space will always cost money, as much as people would like it 
not to, it does, and is a fact of running any commercial business, your 
factor the cost in to your day to day runnings. Your beefs with MS, take it 
up with them, everyone I know is happy with the stack, it's only the lack 
of application support that bugs them.

>Which list do you think is more fair ?

I think it would be more fair if you put together your case and presented 
it on your website in your own words, rather than spraying us with links.

Jim you have a mind that is capable of grasping IPv6, write some stuff up 
and put it on your website. Point ing people to other sites, will not prove 
your mission.

Thanks,
Tom...

----- Original Message -----

IPv6 News & Links
http://hs247.com

---

From: Tom Lohdan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:25:03 +1100

$0 apart from the cost of staff and basic running requirements of any IP 
network on the internet.

IPv6 News & Links
http://hs247.com

---

From: Tom Lohdan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 19:38:00 +1100

Really Jim,

I thought you were much more than resorting to the emailing of an ISP about 
a user.

My Address is listed for the world to see, even my mobile phone number, if 
you would care to do a whois of hs247.com

Pathetic is all I can say.

Tom.

At 02:39 AM 18/11/2001 -0600, Jim Fleming wrote:
>To: <[email-masked]>
>Cc: "Damien Mascré" <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 1:47 AM
>Subject: Re: (ngtrans) To Jim Fleming
>
>
> > Jim,
> >
>Can you send me your mailing address in Australia ?
>
>Jim Fleming

IPv6 News & Links
http://hs247.com

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2001 03:48:54 -0600

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom Lohdan" <[email-masked]>
To: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Cc: "Damien Mascré" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 2:25 AM
Subject: Re: (ngtrans) What do IPv6 3FFE blocks cost these days ?

> Because it is yet again irrelevant to the transition stage. 3FFE is test
> space if would care to read the assignment of IPv6 address space. The
> 2002::/16 space has been assigned for the 6to4 scheme (RFC 3056)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads/sdks/platform/tpipv6/start.asp
"If you have an IPv4 address that is part of the private address space (10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0/12, or 192.168.0.0/16) or the
Automatic Private IP Addressing (APIPA) address space of 169.254.0.0/16 used by Windows 98 and Windows 2000, it is not globally
routable. Otherwise, it is probably a public IP address and is globally routable."
-------------

It does not sound like you are connected to the global Internet,
with your 3FFE IPv6 "test space". This sounds very similar to the
issues with new Top Level Domains, that some say are not part
of the Global Name Space. Instead of "test space", they are
often referred to as "Proof-of-Concept".

For many people on the Internet, the Internet Architecture principles
of "end-to-end" are important. In fact, ICANN, the IETF, and the
IAB have worked closely together to make people aware of what
it means to be "connected" to the real Internet. I assume that your
"testing" in the 3FFE "test space", is simply that, a test and it does not
have an impact on the "real Internet".

As for the real Internet, the transition plan is to keep people
connected and to allow them to migrate using the 2002:[IPv4]:0000
hook that Microsoft added to Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
As we saw with Beta and VHS, the marketplace will decide.

http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
Why not let the marketplace decide ?

2002:<IPv4>:0000:<IPv8> vs. 3FFE:<IPv6>

In the case of 2002, everyone on the existing IPv4 legacy
Internet can easily gain access. In the case of 3FFE, very
few people can gain access. Why not let the marketplace decide ?

Top-down works from a few to many. Bottom-up starts with
many and allows a few to decide to progress. 2002 is bottom-up,
3FFE is top-down. Why not let the marketplace decide ?

Finally...
http://www.google.com/search?q=IPV6+Privacy

2002:<IPv4>:0000:<IPv8> does NOT reveal people's serial numbers

3FFE:<IPv6 including MAC Address> reveals people's serial numbers

Why not let the marketplace decide ?

Jim Fleming

---

From: "Jeroen Massar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 14:37:25 +0100

Tom Lohdan <[email-masked]> wrote:

So that this issue nicely pops up in the future when people search for
Jim's huge problem:
(Sorry couldn't resist ;)

> >http://www.google.com/search?q=IPV6+Privacy+Problem
<SNIP>

> in a 386. The Website owner knows nothing but the type of NIC 
Or even better:

man ifconfig
       hw class address
              Set  the hardware address of this interface, if the
              device driver supports this operation.  The keyword
              must  be followed by the name of the hardware class
              and the printable ASCII equivalent of the  hardware
              address.    Hardware  classes  currently  supported
              include ether (Ethernet), ax25 (AMPR AX.25), ARCnet
              and netrom (AMPR NET/ROM).

Now you figure out if my workstation has a real MAC ending in 42 or that
I just faked it ;)
And what if you got a company with like 10.000 employees and thus around
10.000 NIC's,
just move them around every now and then and then ask Jim if he can find
you <grin>

> >how do they know what I have ?....I better call...."....and may enter
a 
> >long and winding road similar to....http://www.MajesticTheGame.com
> 
Actually I would find it all quite neat..... no more baby diaper adverts
but only the ads targetted at ME! :)
If one really wants to know many things about a person use google or any
other searching engine or pay somebody off or something...

Greets,
 Jeroen

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 08:35:46 -0600

Don't forget to include the IAB/IETF Architecture diagram, it helps people navigate.
http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/IPv6andIPv4.gif

3FFE: is not on the Global Internet, so it is irrelevant.
2002:[IPv4]:0000 people ARE connected, so they can progress.
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html

Once connected, the 2002:[IPv4]:0000 prefixes can be tossed
and routing just happens on the right-most 64-bits. With the
tricks you are using, your right-most 64-bits are a random
number, and therefore not useful for routing. Routing requires a
properly managed address space. Check out all of the TLDs
with IN-ADDR.[TLD] allocated, for "management" of a large
address space.

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

---

From: "Jeroen Massar" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 20:10:00 +0100

Jim Fleming [mailto:[email-masked]] wrote:

> http://unfix.org/projects/ipv6/IPv6andIPv4.gif

a) it's not an official piccy whatsoever
b) How the peep can I 'forget' that picture if I have drawn it myself ?

> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/ietf/Current/msg12213.html
It's not on the IPv4 internet just like everything in the IPv6 world.
And if you didn't notice IPv4 uses 32bits addressing, IPv6 128bits.
and on the IPv6 space
2002::/48 == 6to4
3ffe::/16 == 6bone
2001::/16 == Production IPv6.

And check that picture you mentioned (my picture ;) and you might see
all those nice prefixes (except 2001::/16) given in it.
But as it's all routable.
See amongst others: http://www.switch.ch/lan/ipv6/bgp/ or your beloved
google:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&q=6bone+routing+informat
ion

And now stop kiddying around... before someone decides to block you
again for another month or something.

Greets,
 Jeroen

---

From: "Jim Fleming" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 13:28:18 -0600

Thanks, I am sure that IPv4 Internet users will be glad to hear this.

From: "Jeroen Massar" [email-masked]
"It's not on the IPv4 internet just like everything in the IPv6 world."

"ICANN represents that it has no authority to implement new TLDs"
http://www.icann.org/tlds/correspondence/esi-v-icann-13nov00.htm 

Jim Fleming
http://www.IPv8.info
IPv16....One Better !!

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 11:26:35 -0800

> Jim Fleming [mailto:[email-masked]] wrote:

please don't feed the trolls.  they don't digest the food and just puke on
the furniture.

randy