Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Sun, May 27, 2007 at 05:22:23PM -0400, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>  On 5/26/07, Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:
>
>  [ snip ]
>
> > wow!  you missed the one day workshop in the lacnic meeting you just
> > attended?  bummer.
>
>  I'm lucky enough to be able to attend RIPE, ARIN, and LACNIC meetings
>  so that I can get basic information since I can't get that at a NANOG
>  meeting. I can advertise a v6 prefix, number a host, and I know what a
>  tunnel is. I believe you already understand that I'm talking about
>  operational experiences as well as basic training as a service to our
>  community.
>
>  Your comment seems to accidentally infer that you support my point in
>  that we should have more v6 activity at NANOG meetings and on this
>  list so that people don't have to go to Latin America or Europe to get
>  it.

        In the past two years there have been two events that have
happened jointly with nanog that performed some of this IPv6 training,
but it wasn't as much under the 'NANOG' umbrella as the 'ARIN' one.

        Take the following two:

http://www.arin.net/ARIN-XVIII/ipv6_workshop.html

ARIN XVIII 
Networking with IPv6     Workshop - 
Sunday, 8 October 2006

http://www.nanog.org/mtg-0510/index.html

ARIN and NANOG are offering a special, hands-on tutorial, titled 
Getting Started With IPv6, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Sunday. 
Our other tutorials will begin on Sunday afternoon at 1:30 p.m. The 
General Session begins at 9:00 a.m. on Oct. 24, and ends at 
approximately 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 25. [2005]

        Based on these, and making the ASSumption that I will, perhaps
there is something upcoming for the october joint meeting?  Did you or
other members of the community also miss these two sessions?  What
was missing?  The critique i've generally heard recently is the 
"So what, it just works, but what about all the backend upgrades,
monitoring, etc.. you had to do".  I've not heard a general session
talk on this aspect.  We've usually talked about making the bits move
along the pipes..^Wtubes.

        So, would hearing that yes, we had to adjust our monitoring system
to handle snmp traps to account for that v6 session going down and it
displayed an improper interpretation of the IP address in the monitoring UI?
I personally can't speak for what patchlevel or workarounds had to be done
by the teams that captured some of that data on our side when we went live with
the v6 network, but I know it was an issue that we were able to move past.

        When qualifying new software and hardware, these are things that
one checks on.  If you are starting with IPv6 you can easily set up a
tunnel on an older 26xx and make it work, as well as setting up a bgp session
and clearing it and sending a few traps at your monitoring host.  These are
fairly low-effort things that can be done, but I am sympathetic to those
that are smaller and are time and resource constrained in this space.  They're
the ones who are going to be further stressed as this IPv6 stuff slowly
creeps towards the edge.

        - Jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.