North American IPv6 Task Force

Welcome to the North American IPv6 Task Force website.

The North American IPv6 Task Force (NAv6TF) is a sub-chapter of the IPv6 Forum dedicated to the advancement and propagation of IPv6 (Internet Protocol, version 6) in the North American continent. Comprised of individual members organized under Non-profit 501(c)(3) entities, rather than corporate sponsors, the NAv6TF mission is to provide technical leadership and innovative thought for the successful integration of IPv6 into all facets of networking and telecommunications infrastructure, present and future.

Through its continued facilitation of publications, IPv6 certifications, IPv6-centric conferences, IPv6 test and interoperability events, IPv6 deployment readiness guides, and collaborative leaders from around the globe, the NAv6TF will strive to be the guiding force for IPv6 adoption and readiness in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.

The North American IPv6 Task Force continues to thrive thanks to Jim Bound (2009) and his initial vision of IPv6 adoption.  Jim headed our movement and weaved the social fabric which brought us together. We continue to pursue Jim Bound’s visionary goal of IPv6 Deployment through our voluntary membership of scientists and engineers.  The journey is the reward Jim and each of us thank you for inviting us on your flight.

Posted in NAv6TF | Comments Off on North American IPv6 Task Force

IPv6 & ISPs who only provide Half Service

Broken ISPs

I have been with one of the major Internet Service Providers (ISPs) in Canada for nearly three years now. The service includes a single public IPv4 address, and a delegated /56 Prefix (via DHCPv6-PD) which was quite stable.

This was until three weeks ago when they changed the IPv4 subnet, and issued a new /56 PD. The single IPv4 address worked as expected, but the /56 delegated prefix did not. It was pulled from a pool of addresses which did not route to the internet.

Having been an IPv6 advocate for over 20 years, this IPv6 brokeness by my ISP was concerning. (henceforth I’ll refer as ISP1)

Prefix Delegation Explained

IPv6 is different from IPv4. Each device (laptop, server, etc) must have its own globally unique IPv6 address. This doesn’t mean that each device is reachable from the internet, after all, that is what firewalls are for. But in a home network, the customer must borrow some Provider Aggregatable (PA) Addresses from the ISP. This is done via Prefix Delegation, which is part of the DHCPv6-PD protocol.

Read the entire article at www.makikiweb.com
Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on IPv6 & ISPs who only provide Half Service

IPv6 & Home Router Ban (in the US)

Router BanIt has been in the news recently, that due to security concerns, the FCC will no longer approve routers not made in the USA. What does this mean practically, and how will it affect IPv6 adoption?

Improving Security?

The concern the US Government has over foreign-made home routers is that other countries (most notable, China) makes not only the hardware, but also the software that runs these routers. And that they may have put in back-doors, allowing these foreign governments to spy on Americans.

Not an unreasonable concern, since the US Government already spies on Americans, as Ed Snowden pointed out 10 years ago. So is this really an issue of spying, or who is doing the spying?

Interestingly enough, the FCC order grants conditional exemptions for the US Department of Defense (DoD), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

By banning new routers from FCC approval (and thereby for sale), US consumers will be left with older routers, and firmware that isn’t being updated. This doesn’t sound like improving security.

Read the entire article at www.makikiweb.com

Note: WordPress is being difficult, and not displaying the graphics here

Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on IPv6 & Home Router Ban (in the US)

IPv6 is hovering at around 50% usage according to Google’s Statistics

Check out Google’s tracker for the specifics.

Posted in Google, IPv6, News | Comments Off on IPv6 is hovering at around 50% usage according to Google’s Statistics

IPv6 Takes Flight

IPv6 Flight

On a recent flight, my interest was piqued when the flight attended announced on the PA that there would be free Wifi on the entire flight. Naturally, I took out my phone and connected to the in-flight Wifi, as almost everyone else on the plane did.

But I suspect that others on the plane didn’t look at what addresses they had received from the in-flight Wifi. Looking at the addresses (with the HE app), not only did I have the usual RFC 1918 private IPv4 address, but I also had two global IPv6 addresses!

Read the entire article at www.makikiweb.com

Note: WordPress is being difficult, and not displaying the graphics here

Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on IPv6 Takes Flight

IPv6 Mondays

IPv6 Mondays

Many of us in the IPv6 community have been eagerly waiting for the Google IPv6 Statistics page to show over 50% utilization. We are getting close, topping over 49% on 21 June 2025. Now there are many making predictions as to when the Google Statistic will finally break the 50% mark.

Of course, breaking 50% adoption (as Google calls it), doesn’t mean that IPv4 is finally beaten, and will disappear quickly. There will clearly be the “Long Tail” effect, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see some IPv4 in 2050. The IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) has already decided that there will be no more development (read: RFCs) for IPv4.

Read the entire article at www.makikiweb.com

Note: WordPress is being difficult, and not displaying the charts here

Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on IPv6 Mondays

ULA Precedence Improvements

No Tripping over ULAs IPv6 Unique Local Addresses (ULA) have been problematic since 2012 when RFC 6724 was published. The problem is that a ULA destination address is prioritized lower than an IPv4 address, including RFC 1918 private addresses. If you are implementing IPv6, and you set up a server with a IPv6 ULA and an IPv4 address (in DNS), only the IPv4 address will be used by clients accessing the server. This leads to a false sense that your IPv6 implementation is working just fine.

For this reason, ULAs have been discouraged. That’s about to change with a new RFC working its way through the IETF. The current draft is expected to reach full RFC status by the end of 2025.

Address Selection Precedence, the old way

With the addition of IPv6, there can now be multiple addresses assigned to a single interface (think Wifi, or Ethernet). There can be multiple IPv6 Global Addresses (GUAs), an IPv6 Link-Local address, an IPv4 address, and even multiple ULAs. Because of this, there must be an algorithm or precedence system to determine which address to use. RFC 6724 published in 2012 standardizes a precedence system for the different types of addresses.

      Prefix        Precedence Label
      ::1/128               50     0
      ::/0                  40     1
      ::ffff:0:0/96         35     4
      2002::/16             30     2
      2001::/32              5     5
      fc00::/7               3    13
      ::/96                  1     3
      fec0::/10              1    11
      3ffe::/16              1    12

IPv4 addresses are in the ::ffff:0:0/96 block of addresses (represented as Mapped Addresses)

ULAs are in the fc00::7 block of addresses. Since the first half of fc00::/7 are reserved, ULAs are therefore in the fd00::/8 block, and will always start with FD.

Address Selection Precedence, the new way

The RFC Draft looks to address the Precedence problem by updating the precedence of ULAs higher than IPv4 addresses.


   Prefix        Precedence Label
   ::1/128               50     0
   $known_local/48       45    14 (**)
   ::/0                  40     1
   fc00::/7              30    13 (*)
   ::ffff:0:0/96         20     4 (*)
   2002::/16              5     2 (*)
   2001::/32              5     5
   ::/96                  1     3
   fec0::/10              1    11
   3ffe::/16              1    12

   (*) value(s) changed in update
   (**) $known_local = the ULA Known-Local /48 IPv6 prefix(es)

The new RFC draft introduces the concept of Known-Local address, which is a ULA in the same /48 as the client host. This allows for Known-Local ULAs to be given a higher precedence than IPv6 GUAs, and will result in clients connecting to servers in the same /48 prefix (but on different subnets) to connect using ULA-to-ULA.

Rolling out this change

Sadly, this change is not an easy change using a Router Advertisement (RA) or DHCPv6 option. The Precedence table is located on each host. It can be found at:

OSLocation/Command
Linux/etc/gai.conf
MacOSNone 1
Windowsuse netsh 2
BSDip6addrctl show

Since the precedence is set on each host, one must touch each host to change it. In a SOHO network, it means changing a handful of hosts individually. In an Enterprise environment, one needs to change the precedence on the image that is used to re-image the corporate laptops.

Why wait, test in the lab now

The RFC is on the standards track, and therefore will become an IETF standard once it is published. Now is the time to re-configure a few of your client and server hosts in the lab to better understand how this change will impact your network. This will save you a lot of time in troubleshooting when the next auto-update for the OS occurs.

Part of the IPv6 Protocol evolution

The updated RFC 6724 draft is part of the third wave of improvements to the IPv6 protocol. It isn’t easy creating a new protocol which is implemented world-wide. IPv4 has its short-comings, and they will remain, as there is no more active development by the IETF for IPv4. IPv6 has been tested in the world-wide internet for decades, deficiencies have been found, and the protocol has evolved, and been improved. With this draft becoming a future standard, the use of ULAs will no longer trip you up.


Notes:

  1. MacOS implements RFC 6724 in getaddrinfo function call. There is no easy way to change precedence.
  2. Windows precedence must be configured using netsh. To see the current precedent table type: netsh int ipv6 show prefixpolicies
  3. Some would say that the Precedence table which created the ULA problem was back in RFC 3484, but since RFC 6724 deprecates 3484, I am sticking with 6724.

Photo credits:

Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on ULA Precedence Improvements

Configure IPv6-only subnets and instances with DNS64 and NAT64 on Google Cloud

Google Cloud has announced the ability to configure IPv6-only subnet and instances with DNS64 and NAT64 in Google Cloud. This is fantastic! (see https://cloud.google.com/vpc/docs/connect-ipv6-to-ipv4)

This is not the first cloud provider to do this AWS announced a similar capability in 2021( see https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/networking-and-content-delivery/introducing-ipv6-only-subnets-and-ec2-instances/), however Azure does not yet support IPv6-only capabilities (see https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/ip-services/ipv6-overview).

Posted in AWS, Azure, DNS64, Google Cloud, IPv6-only, NAT64, News | Comments Off on Configure IPv6-only subnets and instances with DNS64 and NAT64 on Google Cloud

Some Thoughts on the IPv6 Development and Deployment in 2024

Sine 1995 when RFC 1883 was published, IPv6 started to evolve towards the protocol needed to cope with the growth of the Internet. Since that time, deployment of IPv6 has grown to almost half of the traffic (as identified by Google). I think that many of us that have been advocating for this deployment are happy to see this growth (though maybe a little impatient with the pace of the growth).

The IETF continues to refine IPv6 to address various deployment and operational situations that have arisen. The most recent work (this is being written between IETF 120 and 121) involves work by both 6MAN (IPv6 Maintenance) and V6OPS ( IPv6 Operations) working groups. Additionally, there is very new working group on the instantiation of Segment Routing (SR) on the IPv6 data plane as well as a long-lived working group on for IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes. All of these have meetings scheduled at IETF 121.

To me, this level of work is encouraging. A lot of the work seems to more concentrated on facilitating enterprise deployments (DHCPv6, for example) and the considerations that arise from IPv6 only and IPv6 mostly networks. If you have interest, please investigate these developments. I know the IETF Is always looking for helpful participants to move along the Internet Standards process.

One more thing: There has been a bit a kerfuffle over the migration of the IETF mailing lists to a new commercial provider. You can read more about it here. I remain concerned that should a provider be used that does not support IPv6 today, the IETF is not really supporting the notion that IPv6 is ready for broad deployment. I realize the complications of supporting email in today’s world and that some of those methods involve reputation evaluation of the email sender based on legacy approaches. However, I am also of the opinion that the IETF is uniquely positioned to develop standards that can supplant these approaches.

Posted in 6lo, 6man, ietf, ipv4, IPv6, networking, srv6ops, technology, v6ops | Comments Off on Some Thoughts on the IPv6 Development and Deployment in 2024

The brand New IPv6 Documentation Addresses are here!

Doc

Since 2004, there has a been a Documentation Prefix for IPv6 (RFC 3849) or 2001:db8::/32. And all though this seems like enough space to allocate for Local Area Networks (LANs), even larger ones, it wasn’t good for creating documentation for Autonomous System (AS) to AS connections using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP4). Each AS would have a 2001:db8::/32 address, and that just isn’t how routers route.

After twenty (20) years, we finally have a second IPv6 Documentation prefix (RFC 9637: Expanding the IPv6 Documentation Space) or 3fff::/20. The new prefix is still part of the original IPv6 unicast address allocation of 2000::3 (which also includes 3000::/3).

What Are Documentation Prefixes

Not surprisingly, Documentation Prefixes should be used in Documentations. In network examples, both in print and online should be using either RFC 3849 or RFC 9637 address space, or both. Here’s an example:

Router test bed

IPv4 Documentation Addresses

Most people use (RFC 1918 Address Allocation for Private Internets) for documenting IPv4 examples. But did you know there are IPv4 addresses specifically allocated for documentation. Back in 2010, RFC 5737 was penned. The following address blocks should be used for IPv4 examples.

  • 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1)
  • 198.51.100.0/24 (TEST-NET-2)
  • 203.0.113.0/24 (TEST-NET-3)

Plenty of room to Document

The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has set aside Prefixes for the purpose of of creating examples in documentation. You can find all the IPv6 allocations at IANA’s website. The IPv6 documentation prefixes are:

So go forth, and document your network examples, there are 4000 times more Documentation Prefixes available.

Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on The brand New IPv6 Documentation Addresses are here!

SSH + Stable SLAAC Address = 6ssh

6sshI use a laptop, like most people. I also tend to put my laptop to sleep several times a day, sometimes for hours. In an IPv6 environment, putting the laptop asleep will break all the ssh (and X11 forwarded apps) sessions that I have running.

I also connect my laptop to several different Wifi Networks at my house, and ssh disconnects happen a lot.

The Problem

With StateLess Address Auto Config (SLAAC), by default IPv6 will use temporary addresses (RFC 8981) for outbound connections, including ssh. While it possible to disable this feature, in most cases I prefer temporary addresses to be used (e.g. https sessions).

However, in the modern world, putting a Linux laptop to sleep, will cause systemd to generate new temporary addresses, and the ssh connection(s) will not be restored after waking up the laptop.

Of course, one could turn off SLAAC, and just run DHCPv6. But I like SLAAC, it just works. And with RFC 7271, SLAAC makes better use of the 64 bit Interface ID (IID) space by generating a pseudo-random IID, making it even harder to guess the hosts IP address.

A solution

By binding the ssh session to a local Stable SLAAC address, the ssh session will remain connected after the laptop wakes up from sleep and reconnects to the network.

There’s a couple of ways to achieve the binding:

  1. Configure BindAddress in your local ssh_config file (~/.ssh/config)
  2. Use the -b option when calling ssh directly

The problem with #1 is that if your laptop roams to another network, the BindAddress will be incorrect, and ssh will no longer work.

The challenge with #2, is you have to figure out what address to place on the command line for the -b parameter

Introducing 6ssh.sh

I have created a bash script to automate the #2 operation. Basically, the script looks at the active interfaces, and selects the first Stable SLAAC Address it finds, and calls ssh -b <stable slaac address>

Like all good scripts, there is help:

$ ./6ssh.sh -h
    ./6ssh.sh - ssh using Stable SLAAC Source Address 
    e.g. ./6ssh.sh <host> 
    -i <int> use this interface
    -u  use ULA address (default GUA)
    -X  use X forwarding

You can find 6ssh.sh on github.

It supports both Linux and BSD (including MacOS).

How long will 6ssh.sh survive a laptop sleep?

It depends. Since ssh uses Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), it depends on the server’s TCP timers. Using the default settings of my Linux server, I have found that the ssh session will survive a laptop sleep over dinner.

My beta tester increased their server TCP timers, and had their ssh session still be active upon waking up the laptop after a 12 hour sleep! Of course, you probably don’t want to change your server’s TCP settings if it is exposed to the internet, since someone will try to exhaust all your TCP buffers (resulting in a DoS attack).

Using ssh and SLAAC is now easy

One no longer has to pine for the old days of just one IP address for an interface. SLAAC is not only easy, but a standardized method for a host to get a Globally Unique (GUA) IPv6 address without requiring a server. And with 6ssh.sh you can sleep/wake your laptop many times during the day, and all your ssh sessions (and X11 forwarded apps) will be there waiting for you.


Notes:

  • SSH Logo from openssh.org of days past.
  • RFC 7271 A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)
  • 6ssh.sh may not be needed on MacOS (as it treats the interfaces differently when the laptop is sleeping)
Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on SSH + Stable SLAAC Address = 6ssh

Container Networking & the IPv6 Advantage

WiresharkI was recently giving a talk on Container Networking, which included LXD/Incus (Incus is the community fork of LXD), Docker and Podman.

One can think of Linux Containers as light weight virtual machines, however, they share the same Linux kernel as the host. Docker of course, is the most popular container framework, but there are others which accomplish the isolation of a specific application, or an entire file system from the host operating system.

It has been a few years, since I have played with Docker, preferring LXD because of its much better IPv6 support. To my pleasant surprise, the Docker proxy now supports IPv6, as well as IPv4.

Docker Manual IPv6 Configuration

I have been unimpressed with Docker’s IPv6 support in the past. When it was added, it was all manual, like a throwback to the 1990s before DHCP, requiring the configuration of address, mask, default gateway, DNS, etc. There was no easy way to have a container pick up your router’s RA (Router Advertisment) and auto configure a SLAAC (Stateless Address Auto Configuration). It was, and is still a very manual operation to get IPv6 going in Docker, and that is assuming that the Container you have selected from Docker Hub even supports IPv6.

The Docker Bridge (Really a Proxy)

Docker has had for some time a component they call a “bridge”. In Classical networking a bridge is a Layer 2 device, that forwards packets based on destination MAC address. This is not how the Docker Bridge works.

The Docker bridge includes input/output port mapping, and even IP protocol conversion (IPv6<->IPv4). More on this later.

The advantage/disadvantage of the Docker framework bridge is that it creates isolation of the container from the network. For example, only certain TCP/UDP ports are forwarded into the Container.

Starting a Simple Docker Container

As you will find there are thousands of pre-made Docker containers on Docker Hub. Let’s start with a relatively simple one, called containous/whoami. It just reports the IP address of the container and the remote IP address of the HTTP request.

Assuming you have Docker installed and running on your host (I used a Raspberry Pi), start this simple container with the following command:

docker run -d -p 8888:80 --name iamfoo containous/whoami

The -p parameter maps the container’s port 80 to an external (on the host side) port of 8888.

Querying Your Docker Container

Now that you have whoami running, point your Web browser at the IP address of your host, including port 8888, Or use curl to see the output of whoami, like this:

$ curl http://192.168.1.100:8888/

In the above request, the host’s IP address is 192.168.1.100. Great, you can see that whoami has the following output:

Hostname: 2ba0cb4e37c0
IP: 127.0.0.1
IP: ::1
IP: 172.17.0.2
RemoteAddr: 172.17.0.1:44898
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: 192.168.1.100:8888
User-Agent: curl/7.81.0
Accept: */*

As you can see the remote address (RemoteAddr) is listed as 172.17.0.1. Clearly the Docker Proxy is doing NAT (Network Address Translation).

Docker Proxy Now Supports IPv6

Not sure in which version, but in the past few years, the Docker Proxy now also opens a listening socket on IPv6, in the above example on port 8888. netstat will show the open port on IPv6

$ sudo netstat -antp
...
Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address           Foreign Address         State       PID/Program name    
tcp        0      0 :::8888                 :::*                    LISTEN      4932/docker-proxy

Querying Your Docker Container Over IPv6

We do a similar web request using curl but this time, we’ll use the IPv6 address of the host. Since we are using a bare IPv6 address, it must be wrapped in square brackets.

$ curl http://[2001:db8::100]:8888/

Hostname: 2ba0cb4e37c0
IP: 127.0.0.1
IP: ::1
IP: 172.17.0.2
RemoteAddr: 172.17.0.1:45704
GET / HTTP/1.1
Host: [2001:db8::100]:8888
User-Agent: curl/7.81.0
Accept: */*

Congratulations, we just made a HTTP request over IPv6 to a Docker Container without having to do all the manual IPv6 configuration.

Limitations to the Docker Proxy IPv6 Support

The biggest limitation of this method, is that each Docker Container must be mapped to a unique listening port, and some how this special port has to be communicated to the user.

For example, if I want to run three (3) Docker Containers on a host all running some type of web application, I would have to map each container to a unique port, such as port 8881, 8882, 8883, and then tell everyone that to access web service 2 they have to add :8882 to the address. Not the best solution.

Utilizing an IPv6 Advantage

As an IPv6 advocate, I think IPv6 has many advantages. But even the stalwart IPv4-forever folks realize that IPv6 has many, many more addresses than IPv4.

And we can use this advantage with Docker Containers, because we can bind a container to a specific address, rather than listening to :::8888 (from netstat command above).

Binding a Container to a Specific Address

By specifying an address as part of the port mapping -p parameter, the Docker Proxy will bind, or open a listening socket to that specific address.

First we need to kill the previous whoami container, and delete it (using the docker container ID).

docker stop 2ba0cb4e37c0
docker remove 2ba0cb4e37c0

Then we will restart it providing a specific IPv6 address. Again we have to enclose the IPv6 address in square brackets, and then quotes to keep the shell from doing odd things with our square brackets

docker run -d -p "[2001:db8::100]:80:80" --name iamfoo containous/whoami

Now the docker ps command output looks like:

$ docker ps
CONTAINER ID   IMAGE               COMMAND     CREATED          STATUS         PORTS                      NAMES
d0800e8d1896   containous/whoami   "/whoami"   11 seconds ago   Up 9 seconds   2001:db8::100:80->80/tcp   iamfoo

And netstat shows:

$ sudo netat -antp
Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address           Foreign Address         State       PID/Program name    
tcp        0      0 2001:db8::100:80        :::*                    LISTEN      4176/docker-proxy

Using the IPv6 Advantage

Of course, some would say what we did above is retrograde motion since we had a dual stack container listening on port 80, and we have made it a container listening only to IPv6, and you would be right.

You might argue, however, that we still can only have one web service running on port 80 (or 443).

This is where the IPv6 advantage comes in. We can have many, many IPv6 addresses on our host. For example, we might have ten (10) IPv6 addresses on the host, after all, there is no shortage of IPv6 addresses. So we might assign the following to our host:

2001:db8::100
2001:db8::200
2001:db8::201
2001:db8::202
...
2001:db8::208
2001:db8::209

Of course, you would set up DNS AAAA entries for each of the additional IPv6 addresses, something like:

web1    IN  AAAA    2001:db8::201
web2    IN  AAAA    2001:db8::202
...
web9    IN  AAAA    2001:db8::209

Now when you start another Docker Container, bind it to the next IPv6 address. Unfortunately, the docker command won’t resolve the DNS name in the -p parameter, so you will still have use the IP address, but this can be easily fixed with a three line script:

    export HOST="web2"
    export IPADDR=$(host $HOST | awk '{print $5}')
    docker run -d -p "[$IPADDR]:80:80" containous/whoami

Now you can have multiple docker containers all listening on port 80 (or 443) running on the same host without having to go though the 1990s pain of manually configuring IPv6.

As a bonus, your users don’t have to add a special port to their web request. Instead they will just use a normal URL, such as http://web2

Working with Podman

Podman is another container framework that supports OCI (Open Container Initiative). It can run Docker Containers, and I find I like it better than Docker. In the default mode it runs “rootless”, which generally doesn’t require root privileges or membership of a special group, to run containers. Since Podman also supports OCI, it can run Docker containers directly with the command:

    export HOST="web3"
    export IPADDR=$(host $HOST | awk '{print $5}')
    podman run -rm -p "[$IPADDR]:80:80" docker.io/containous/whoami

The IPv6 Advantage

Of course, this assumes you have a dual stack network up and running (and here’s a good reason to do so). There is no need to have your entire network configured for IPv6-only.

You could use the above method of mapping Docker/Podman containers to IPv4-only addresses, but seriously, who has that many unused IPv4 addresses just laying around.

So go forth, and create as many web-services containers as you need, using an IPv6 advantage.

Notes:

  • I still prefer LXD/Incus, since containers get their IPv6 address automatically from RAs (either SLAAC or DHCPv6, depending on the OS inside the container). But it is good to know that one can run podman/docker containers in a dual stack or IPv6-only network.
Posted in ipv6hawaii | Comments Off on Container Networking & the IPv6 Advantage

10th Anniversary Celebration of World IPv6 Launch Day – Scott Hogg, North American IPv6 Task Forces

This presentation is both a celebration of the work performed to get IPv6 adoption to this point in North America. It also covers what work remains to continue to further IPv6 education, adoption, and usage beyond the service provider and large-enterprise level.

Posted in CAv6TF, General, IPv6, IPv6 Forum, IPv6 Forum Mexico, IPv6 Transition, NAv6TF, rmv6tf, TXv6TF, Uncategorized, World IPv6 Day | Comments Off on 10th Anniversary Celebration of World IPv6 Launch Day – Scott Hogg, North American IPv6 Task Forces

Jeff Carrell Will Present to DETSEC February 24

In networking, IP as we call it is generally Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4). Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) is the replacement for IP running in today’s networks. 23 years after the initial release of IPv6 we observe that many networks are not formally implementing IPv6, however, most modern desktop/server OS’s have had IPv6 enabled for 8+ years. That means many IT departments and technologists don’t understand that IPv6 is in fact all over their networks nor what the potential implications are.

This session will cover a few IPv6 basics and then dive into a real-world demonstration accessing a live network and the recon/exploit of an “IPv4 only” network using IPv6.

Plan to attend at 7pm CT on February 24th.

Contact jeff.carrell@gmail.com the get the Zoom Meeting information.

Posted in General, IPv6, TXv6TF | Comments Off on Jeff Carrell Will Present to DETSEC February 24

Jeff Carrell @ DFW-CUG in February 2021

TXv6TF’s own Jeff Carrell will be speaking at the upcoming DFW-CUG (Cisco Users Group) meeting in February, 2021. He will presenting on Wireshark and as part of that will speak to IPv6 capabilities. More information on the meeting is on the DFW-CUG website.

Posted in DFW-CUG, General, Jeff Carrell, News | Comments Off on Jeff Carrell @ DFW-CUG in February 2021

IPv6 Article in Enterprise Executive Magazine

This article points out the impact on businesses of the IPv6-only directive in the Federal Government. I encourage every enterprise IT person to take a moment to read it.

Posted in Enterprise Executive Magazine, General, IPv6 in Federal Government, News | Comments Off on IPv6 Article in Enterprise Executive Magazine

The Impact of Covid-19 on IPv6

Check out this podcast from some of my favorite IPv6 guys. They are discussing some impacts on IPv6 usage in during the Covid-19 Pandamic.

Stay well and safe!

 

Posted in Covid-19, General, IPv6, News | Comments Off on The Impact of Covid-19 on IPv6

Great Article at Techradar

Check out IPv4 – this time it’s really over by Nickolas Pendiadtis.

Comments Off on Great Article at Techradar

NIST NCCoE is Hosting a Workshop on IPv6 Enabled Enterprises

 

NIST NCCoE will host a workshop on Security for IPv6 Enabled Enterprises.  The focus will be to identify and develop plans to address security challenges / barriers to full IPv6 deployment in enterprise settings.

Please see the call for participation below for more details and to register.
https://www.nccoe.nist.gov/events/security-ipv6-enabled-enterprises

Questions about workshop participation should be sent to: ipv6-transition@nist.gov

 

Posted in General, News | Comments Off on NIST NCCoE is Hosting a Workshop on IPv6 Enabled Enterprises

Teaching IPv6

Teaching IPv6IPv6 Buzz 025: Teaching IPv6 With Instructor And Author Rick Graziani

The IPv6 Buzz podcast often focuses on learning IPv6. On today’s show, we turn that idea around to talk with a renowned instructor about teaching it.

Our guest is Rick Graziani, a CS/CIS instructor at Cabrillo College, adjunct faculty at University of California Santa Cruz, and a 20-year veteran of the Cisco Networking Academy curriculum engineering team.

Rick is also the author of IPv6 Fundamentals: A Straightforward Approach to Understanding IPv6 on Cisco Press (and recently updated with a 2nd edition).

We talk about the differences between teaching college students vs. training IT professionals, how IT and networking are taught in higher education today, and what Rick himself has learned from teaching.

Other topics include:

  • Rick’s approach to teaching IPv6 in classrooms, books, and videos
  • Classroom or academic knowledge vs. practical experience
  • How the community college approach to teaching IPv6 differs from the university setting
  • Challenges his students face with learning IPv6  (as opposed to IPv4)

Thanks for listening!

The post Teaching IPv6 appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on Teaching IPv6

Enterprise IPv6 Address Planning Revisited

Enterprise IPv6 Address Planning

IPv6 Buzz 024: Enterprise IPv6 Address Planning Revisited

At a recent Packet Pushers Virtual Design Clinic, IPv6 Buzz co-host Tom Coffeen gave a technical presentation on IPv6 Address Planning.

Unfortunately, Tom ran out of time before he could get through his whole presentation. On today’s episode, Tom gets another crack at it.

Guests Ethan Banks and Drew Conry-Murray join the show to ask follow-up questions and dig into address planning details including:

  • IPv6 nibble boundaries and why they’re so useful for subnetting
  • How to get over an IPv4 mindset when planning for v6
  • Key differences between Provider Independent (PI) and Provider Assigned (PA) address space
  • Recommendations for v6 subnetting tools
  • How enterprise tools for DNS, DHCP, and IPAM are–and aren’t–ready for IPv6

Thanks for listening!

The post Enterprise IPv6 Address Planning Revisited appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on Enterprise IPv6 Address Planning Revisited

State Task Forces Drive IPv6 Adoption

How State Task Forces Drive IPv6 AdoptionWondering how State Task Forces drive IPv6 Adoption?

State and regional IPv6 task forces are non-profit organizations that advocate for IPv6 adoption by state governments and the private sector. They also educate engineers about the protocol to help spur v6 projects.

In today’s episode Ed, Scott, and Tom chat with George Usi, the Co-Chair of the California IPv6 Task Force as well as a standards advocate and IPv6 evangelist. George is also President of SACTECH, which helps businesses enforce and maintain cyber compliance.

Topics discussed include:

  • What is the California IPv6 task force and what does it (and other regional IPv6 task forces) do?
  • What has the impact of the task force been on overall IPv6 adoption?
  • What milestones has the task force achieved?
  • What objectives still need to be reached?
  • How do government policy and legislation affect IPv6 adoption?

Thanks for listening!

The post State Task Forces Drive IPv6 Adoption appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on State Task Forces Drive IPv6 Adoption

Critical Security Differences Between IPv4 And IPv6

Critical Security Differences Between IPv4 And IPv6When it comes to security, there are a few critical differences between IPv4 and IPv6 that organizations need to be aware of, including host addressing and extension headers.

We examine these differences, as well as other v6 security issues, with our guest Eric Vyncke, a Distinguished Engineer at Cisco and co-author of IPv6 Security(Cisco Press).

Eric is the Co-Chair of the Belgium IPv6 Council as well as the Co-Chair of Operational Security Capabilities for IP Network Infrastructure (OPSEC) Working Group at the IETF (where he has authored many RFCs).

Topic discussed include:

  • The general IPv6 security landscape
  • The differences and similarities between IPv4 and IPv6 security
  • The “latent threat” of IPv6 and what to do about it
  • Some innovative ways IPv6 is being used

Thanks for listening!

Show Links:

IPv6 Security – Cisco Press

IPv6 Deployment Aggregated Status – Vyncke.org

What Color is Your IPv6 Address? – Vyncke.org

Your Hosts:

The post Critical Security Differences Between IPv4 And IPv6 appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on Critical Security Differences Between IPv4 And IPv6

IPv6 Buzz 021: NAT Isn’t Necessary For Security: Answering Listener Questions

NAT Isn't Necessary For Security: Answering Listener QuestionsIn today’s IPv6 Buzz we answer listener questions about our favorite addressing protocol, including

  • I thought NAT was necessary for security? Isn’t my network less secure without NAT at the edge?
  • I tend to disable IPv6 whenever I can. Is that bad?
  • How feasible is it to scan an IPv6 network to discover devices?

Thanks for listening (and keep the questions coming)!

Show Links:

RFC 4864: Local Network Protection for IPv6 – IETF

RFC 6724: Default Address Selection for IPv6 – IETF

3 Ways to Ruin Your Future Network with IPv6 Unique Local Addresses – Infoblox

Your Hosts:

The post IPv6 Buzz 021: NAT Isn’t Necessary For Security: Answering Listener Questions appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on IPv6 Buzz 021: NAT Isn’t Necessary For Security: Answering Listener Questions

IPv6 Buzz 020: Demystifying IPv6 Protocol Analysis With Denise Fishburne

Demystifying IPv6 Protocol Analysis with Denise Fishburne In today’s episode we make sense of IPv6 protocol analysis with expert teacher and troubleshooter Denise Fishburne.

Denise is an 18-year veteran of the Cisco Customer Proof of Concept lab, where she’s an engineer and team lead. She’s also a Cisco solutions architect, CCIE #2639, CCDE #2009::0014, a CiscoPress technical reviewer, and is in the CiscoLive! Distinguished Speaker Hall of Fame.

Topics include:

  • The importance of using a protocol analyzer and packet captures to better understand IPv6
  • Why being able to configure IPv6 routing protocols won’t necessarily prepare you for troubleshooting IPv6
  • The psychological barrier of a /64 as a LAN subnet (and the general fear of learning IPv6)
  • Why IoT requires an IPv6 security practice
  • Network traffic security analytics

Thanks for listening!

Show Links:

Understanding IPv6: The Journey Begins (Part 1 of 7) – Networking With FISH

Denise on Twitter

Your Hosts:

The post IPv6 Buzz 020: Demystifying IPv6 Protocol Analysis With Denise Fishburne appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on IPv6 Buzz 020: Demystifying IPv6 Protocol Analysis With Denise Fishburne

IPv6 Buzz 019: IPv6 And Broadband Internet Cable Providers

IPv6 And Broadband Internet Cable ProvidersIn the latest episode of IPv6 Buzz we examine IPv6 deployment among cable providers. We’ll discuss industry trends, dual-stack deployments, and how the cable industry is working to transition IPv4 out of the providers’ access and distribution networks.

Topics include:

  • The status of IPv6 deployment among cable providers
  • Why an IPv6-only network with IPv4 running as a service (IPv4aaS) is desirable for cable provider networks
  • What prevents some cable providers from adopting IPv6
  • The DOCSIS standard and why it’s important for IPv6
  • Why a /56 IPv6 prefix is likely the best minimum size for home networks

Our guest is Dan Torbet, Director of Systems Engineering at ARRIS. He’s worked in the cable/MSO Internet industry for over 25 years.

Dan was an active participant in industry efforts around DOCSIS 3.0 and Modular CMTS specifications and has been a long time advocate of IPv6 adoption including as a very active Rocky Mountain IPv6 Task Force member and volunteer.

Thanks for listening!

Show Links:

Rocky Mountain IPv6 Task Force

Arris.com

CableLabs Specifications Library

World IPv6 Launch Measurements

Your Hosts:

The post IPv6 Buzz 019: IPv6 And Broadband Internet Cable Providers appeared first on Rocky Mountain IPv6 Taskforce.

Posted in Podcasts | Comments Off on IPv6 Buzz 019: IPv6 And Broadband Internet Cable Providers