Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

[Adrian Chadd <adrian () creative net au>]

On Tue, May 29, 2007, michael.dillon () bt com wrote:

> That's why I suggested that NANOG run some kind of IPv6 vendor showcase
> in which all the vendors would be running an interoperable IPv6 network.
> As many have pointed out, this is not just about routers since Cisco and
> Juniper have had IPv6 support for years and both are in use on
> production IPv6 networks in Asia. People need to see things like the
> Hexago gateways, Teredo servers, proxies, management consoles/tools, and
> so on. Even the easy stuff needs to be on display because if it can't be
> seen then people will not believe that it is easy. 

> From someone who hasn't looked into IPv6 customer deployments:

* So is DHCPv6 the "way to go" for deploying IPv6 range(s) to end-customers?
  Considering the current models of L2TP over IP for broadband aggregation
  and wholesaling where the customer device speaks PPPoX.
* Has anyone sat down and thought about the security implications for running
  native IPv6 addresses on end-devices which, at the moment, don't have 'direct'
  access to the internet (ie sitting behind a NAT.)
* Has anyone looked into the effects of oppertunistic IPSEC on stuff like
  network IDSes?
k



Adrian