[Bp_ipv6] BPF IPv6 - public input

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Tue Nov 8 12:19:01 EST 2016


Hola Omar,

My responses in-line.

Saludos,
Jordi


-----Mensaje original-----
De: Omar de León - Teleconsult <omar.deleon at teleconsult.world>
Responder a: <omar.deleon at teleconsult.world>
Fecha: lunes, 7 de noviembre de 2016, 22:51
Para: <jordi.palet at consulintel.es>, <bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org>
Asunto: RE: [Bp_ipv6] BPF IPv6 - public input

    Jordi, how are you? Please refer to the comments below. Best Regards, Omar
    -----Mensaje original-----
    De: Bp_ipv6 [mailto:bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.org] En nombre de JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
    Enviado el: lunes, 07 de noviembre de 2016 14:19
    Para: bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
    Asunto: Re: [Bp_ipv6] BPF IPv6 - public input
    Hi Omar, all,
    I think this is a very dangerous thinking and seriously terrible for Africa … let me explain.
    I’m talking about:
    1.       Africa still has enough IPv4 addresses and so, by the moment, there should not be noticeable problems not deploying IPv6.
    If an executive read this (even many engineers), they will have a broken idea of the situation. This has been the main reason in other regions we didn’t succeeded to deploy IPv6 on time, even in most occasions to prepare for it. This is the reason the ISP didn’t asked for IPv6 support in the CPEs more than 10 years ago, when it was the right time, so the vendors didn’t add support for it, and now because most of the CPEs last for more than 10 years (specially in weakest economies), it may take a lot of extra time or money to replace them and the vendors are waiting like wolfs to sell new CPEs instead of investing in a new firmware version. Same is applicable to OSS, and many other platforms.
    
    CAF LACNIC document on IPv6 deployment, named “IPv6 Deployment for Social and Economic Development in Latin America and the Caribbean” shares your general concern (but not about vendors intentions), and it is deeply focused on where we are, why, and what to do now. We focus not only on ISPs, but also on other stakeholders that are main drivers of IPv6, as are governmental institutions and universities. A significant number of cases are presented, including extra region cases, that provide support, together with other fundamentals, to start as soon as possible to do what is included on the bullets 6 and 7. 

⇒ Well, vendors are doing that, I can tell you for sure. There a very few with are society-responsible, all the others, don’t care about small ISPs, just look for supporting what is requested by “big” ISPs, that buy several hundred thousands of CPEs in a single contract.
    
    Even if you have “sufficient” IPv4 addresses, you need to START YESTERDAY (today is already too late), to make a medium and long term plan, design your network with IPv6, make your addressing plan, ask the RIR for the correct addressing space, start testing it, and make sure that new acquisitions, even if it will take several years to enable IPv6, have the right IPv6 support.
    Even much more, from the IPv6 survey, despite how much training we have provided in LACNIC (and also APNIC, AfriNIC), it is obvious that the ISPs have a broken mind about IPv6. They still look at it as IPv4, so they do very bad things when they deploy it. This will mean the cost will double when they realize it and need to make corrections. Probably many people doing IPv6 trainings (I’ve seen that many times, even from vendors that only want to sell boxes and then provide an “IPv6 training” for free, or big training companies, etc.), don’t have the *real* knowledge, I mean in the field with real deployment experiences, so they are missing key points y they transmit the information wrongly.
    
    We have additionally conducted a further thorough investigation through face to face interviews on 10 countries with multiple stakeholders in each of them. Certainly we don´t arrive to the same conclusions.

⇒ Please see my presentation at RIPE, and stay tuned to the article being published this week both, RIPE and APNIC. The data is from 1.200 responses, not sure if you had so many. The data speaks by itself, and confirms what I’ve seen in several regions. People using /64 for end-users. This is WORST that actually not deploying IPv6. People filtering PMTUD, which means that big data centres aren’t accessible neither by IPv4 nor IPv6 when you have a residential customer with IPv6 enabled. I’m not talking about a few websites, I’m talking about thousands of inaccessible sites. Both are guilty, ISPs with not enough experience, training companies doing trainings w/o a real field experience, and also data-centers or IT managers that don’t have the right IPv6 knowledge and keep deploying it as if it was IPv4. For example, a recent country I’ve visited in LAC region, the government was very happy because they got a dozen of ministries, national banks, etc., with IPv6-enabled. Guess what. When I checked it, it was not working at all, PMTUD was filtered, so depending on your access network you can see it, or not. Also routing was broken in the main upstream provider. Talking with the government unit responsible for training that people, they had only “theoretical” experience about IPv6 …
    
    2.       So, ISP that are not needing to replace obsolete equipment has no incentive to deploy IPv6.
    Right, not now, but if you don’t have a plan, will keep buying the old ones, and vendors will take advantage of it.
    
    We have not grasped that situation.

⇒ Believe me is happening …
    
    3.       If you have enough IPv4 the first incentives to appear shall be content or applications not available at all on IPv4.
    Right, but this is already here. IPv6 is mandatory in AppStore, and apps not able to work IPv6-only, are being retired. Most of the developers and I’m sure this is happening as well in Africa, don’t realize it, not to say governments, corporates, etc. If they don’t have this in mind now, if they ISPs don’t deploy IPv6 today, they will be soon in an isolated IPv4-only Internet, unless they spend extra money to do some strange translators from IPv4-only to IPv6-only. The cost of that may be at least a good proportion of the IPv6 deployment cost.
    
    What happened with Apple is not exactly that the apps will not be available on IPv4 anymore, but that all must support IPv6 only.   

⇒ Yes and not. AppStore apps must support, at this stage, IPv6-only networks. The next release 10.2 (now in beta), will be IPv6-only. Apple is forcing the move to IPv6, which is a very good news, but many 3G/4G networks aren’t ready.
    
    5.       Other ISP may be still waiting and thinking that they will be able to use CGNAT, if IPv4 addresses become exhausted.
    Yeah, but then you still have the problem as in 3., and addition, you can’t identify attackers in your network, your IPv4 range becomes banned by Sony Play Station (already happening), geolocation and file sharing apps doesn’t work, etc., etc.
    
    We agree. All what you mention is analyzed on our document, including a valuation of the cost of remaining on CGNAT.
    
    Regards,
    Jordi
    
    -----Mensaje original-----
    De: Bp_ipv6 <bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.org> en nombre de Omar de León - Teleconsult <omar.deleon at teleconsult.world> Responder a: <omar.deleon at teleconsult.world>
    Fecha: lunes, 7 de noviembre de 2016, 17:23
    Para: 'abdarahim youssouf' <abdarahim_youssouf at yahoo.fr>, 'Willy MANGA' <mangawilly at gmail.com>, <bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org>
    Asunto: Re: [Bp_ipv6] BPF IPv6 - public input
        Dear Abdarahim, we have been working deeply on these issues at LACNIC and we got some main conclusions that can be related to Africa.
         
        1.       Africa still has enough IPv4 addresses and so, by the moment, there should not be noticeable problems not deploying IPv6.
        2.       So, ISP that are not needing to replace obsolete equipment has no incentive to deploy IPv6.
        3.       If you have enough IPv4 the first incentives to appear shall be content or applications not available at all on IPv4.
        4.       One case, among several other cases, is that of Orange that has decided to make an strategic deployment of IPv6 in Africa taking into consideration the above point. They want to be prepared using the time on their side and considering the exhaustion for 2019.
        5.       Other ISP may be still waiting and thinking that they will be able to use CGNAT, if IPv4 addresses become exhausted.
        6.       In these cases we think that the best strategy always will be, at least, to progressively replace obsolete equipment by DS modern one.
        7.       Equipment is not only network assets including the most visible customer access, but mainly the backoffice hard and soft (BSS/OSS, Firewalls, addresses stock management and so on) as well as strong personnel training. 
         
        Here is the link to the full report in english: http://portalipv6.lacnic.net/wp-content/caf-lacnic/CAF-LACNIC-IPv6-Deployment-Social-Economic-Development-in-LAC.pdf (Orange case including Africa on page 61)
         
        An economic model (Spanish) can be reached at: http://stats.labs.lacnic.net/PROYECTOCAF/modelo/ 
         
        Best Regards, Omar
         
        De: Bp_ipv6 [mailto:bp_ipv6-bounces at intgovforum.org] En nombre de abdarahim youssouf
        Enviado el: domingo, 06 de noviembre de 2016 14:14
        Para: Willy MANGA <mangawilly at gmail.com>; bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
        Asunto: Re: [Bp_ipv6] BPF IPv6 - public input
        
        
         
        Dear All !
        
         
        
        Some countries like Nigeria ,South Africa, Kenya and Egypt  have implemented IPV6,
        
        
        
        
        
        Why ipv6 deployment is slow in Africa what to do about-it ?
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        More an information check this links Ipv6 deployment is slow in Africa <http://www.circleid.com/posts/20151018_why_ipv6_deployment_is_slow_in_africa_what_to_do_about_it/>
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
         Some couuntries Niger , South Sudan, Central Africa Republic and Chad is very lack IPV6 Implemented,
        
        
        
        
        
        Case in Chad  it has been hold  only 5 Trainings organized by Afrinic with a local hosts ISOC CHAD, HTCE, ADETIC, IPV6 TASK FORCE CHAD, SOTEL CHAD, AUF,
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        IPV6 Task force work closely for outreach and Sensitization, we have only 8 LIR, 2 End-Users, and  0 Associate member  to AFRINIC and
        
        
        
        There is big difference between Chad and South Africa concerning IPV6 Test. for more information see the links below : Chad <http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/TD> and South Africa <http://ipv6-test.com/stats/country/ZA>
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        and also see the link below Delegations AS TD <https://www-public.tem-tsp.eu/~maigron/RIR_Stats/RIR_Delegations/Delegations/ASN/TD.html>
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        Best Regards
        
        Youssouf Abdelrahim
        
        President IPV6 TASK FORCE CHAD
        
        
        
        
        
         
        
         
        
         
        
         
        
         
        
        Le Samedi 5 novembre 2016 18h47, Willy MANGA <mangawilly at gmail.com> a écrit :
        
         
        Hello,
        
        Le 04/11/2016 à 19:16, bp_ipv6-request at intgovforum.org a écrit :
        > Send Bp_ipv6 mailing list submissions to
        >[...]
        > Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 02:08:37 +0900 (JST)
        > From: ?? ? <izumiokutani at yahoo.co.jp>
        >[...]
        > It would also be good to hear more cases about African and Middle Eastern case, both successful and challenges.
        
        
        In Africa, you should look closer to what Liquid Telecom has achieved in
        Kenya [1] and Zimbabwe [2][3] this year.
        
        
        1. https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/2016-August/002756.html
        
        2. https://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/2016-September/002869.html
        
        3. http://labs.apnic.net/cgi-bin/ccpagev6?c=zw
        
        
        
        
        -- 
        Willy Manga
        freenode: ongolaBoy
        Ubuntu Cameroonian Loco Team
        https://launchpad.net/~manga-willy
        
        _______________________________________________
        Bp_ipv6 mailing list
        Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
        http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        _______________________________________________
        Bp_ipv6 mailing list
        Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
        http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
        
    
    
    **********************************************
    IPv4 is over
    Are you ready for the new Internet ?
    http://www.consulintel.es
    The IPv6 Company
    This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Bp_ipv6 mailing list
    Bp_ipv6 at intgovforum.org
    http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org
    



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

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







More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list