Mailing List Archive: nsp: ipv6

Future of the IPv6 CPE survey - Your Input Needed

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

mir at ripe

Jan 24, 2011, 6:28 AM

Post #1 of 4 (763 views)
Permalink

Future of the IPv6 CPE survey - Your Input Needed

[apologies for duplicates]

Dear colleagues,

Based on new information we received since the last publication, we
updated the IPv6 CPE matrix:

http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011

In order to make this information more useful for a large user base, we
are preparing a detailed survey to gather more structural feedback about
the range of equipment that is currently in use. Not only would we like
you to participate in this survey, but we also ask you for help in
identifying the right survey questions. Please find a call for input on
RIPE Labs:

http://labs.ripe.net/Members/marco/future-of-the-ipv6-cpe-survey-more-input-needed

Kind Regards,
Mirjam Kuehne & Marco Hogewoning
RIPE NCC

mathieu.goessens at irisa

Feb 4, 2011, 10:28 AM

Post #2 of 4 (657 views)
Permalink

Re: Future of the IPv6 CPE survey - Your Input Needed [In reply to]

On 24/01/2011 15:28, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> Based on new information we received since the last publication, we
> updated the IPv6 CPE matrix:
>
> http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011
>
> In order to make this information more useful for a large user base, we
> are preparing a detailed survey to gather more structural feedback about
> the range of equipment that is currently in use. Not only would we like
> you to participate in this survey, but we also ask you for help in
> identifying the right survey questions. Please find a call for input on
> RIPE Labs:

Hi,

It could be interesting to re-use the work of the ipv6ready logo [1] /
ipv6forum [2].

They are doing conformance and interoperability testing using a bench of
tests [3] covering IPv6 core protocol, DHCPv6, IPsec and some other
protocols (SNMP, SIP...) .

You could find the list of tested boxes/implementations at [4].
Some CPEs listed in the survey are already tested (like zyxel ones).

[1] http://www.ipv6ready.org/
[2] http://www.ipv6forum.com/
[3] http://www.ipv6ready.org/?page=phase-2-tech-info
[4] http://www.ipv6ready.org/db/

Best regards,

--
Mathieu Goessens,
IRISA, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes cedex, France
Tel: +33 (0) 2 99 84 71 00, Fax: +33 (0) 2 99 84 71 71

mch-v6ops at xs4all

Feb 5, 2011, 9:53 AM

Post #3 of 4 (655 views)
Permalink

Re: Future of the IPv6 CPE survey - Your Input Needed [In reply to]

On 4 feb 2011, at 19:28, Mathieu Goessens wrote:

> On 24/01/2011 15:28, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
>> Based on new information we received since the last publication, we
>> updated the IPv6 CPE matrix:
>>
>> http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011
>>
>> In order to make this information more useful for a large user base, we
>> are preparing a detailed survey to gather more structural feedback about
>> the range of equipment that is currently in use. Not only would we like
>> you to participate in this survey, but we also ask you for help in
>> identifying the right survey questions. Please find a call for input on
>> RIPE Labs:
>
> Hi,
>
> It could be interesting to re-use the work of the ipv6ready logo [1] / ipv6forum [2].
>
> They are doing conformance and interoperability testing using a bench of tests [3] covering IPv6 core protocol, DHCPv6, IPsec and some other protocols (SNMP, SIP...) .

And that is exactly where we are going to differ. This is aimed at real people and real environments. The first few iterations we did already show some big differences in what the box says and what people experience is. Something can be fully compliant with every RFC and still have issues or being regarded as unusable.

I personally expect every box hitting the market being RFC compliant. We are interested in what happens when you come home and plug it in.

Grtx,

MarcoH

--
"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again"

nanog at 85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc

Feb 5, 2011, 5:07 PM

Post #4 of 4 (643 views)
Permalink

Re: Future of the IPv6 CPE survey - Your Input Needed [In reply to]

On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 18:53:45 +0100
MarcoH - lists <mch-v6ops [at] xs4all> wrote:

>
> On 4 feb 2011, at 19:28, Mathieu Goessens wrote:
>
> > On 24/01/2011 15:28, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> >> Based on new information we received since the last publication, we
> >> updated the IPv6 CPE matrix:
> >>
> >> http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011
> >>
> >> In order to make this information more useful for a large user base, we
> >> are preparing a detailed survey to gather more structural feedback about
> >> the range of equipment that is currently in use. Not only would we like
> >> you to participate in this survey, but we also ask you for help in
> >> identifying the right survey questions. Please find a call for input on
> >> RIPE Labs:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > It could be interesting to re-use the work of the ipv6ready logo [1] / ipv6forum [2].
> >
> > They are doing conformance and interoperability testing using a bench of tests [3] covering IPv6 core protocol, DHCPv6, IPsec and some other protocols (SNMP, SIP...) .
>
>
> And that is exactly where we are going to differ. This is aimed at real people and real environments. The first few iterations we did already show some big differences in what the box says and what people experience is. Something can be fully compliant with every RFC and still have issues or being regarded as unusable.
>
> I personally expect every box hitting the market being RFC compliant. We are interested in what happens when you come home and plug it in.
>

My past experience has sometimes been the other way around. It doesn't
comply with an RFC, but "works". That's testament to the robustness of
other RFC compliant implementations that are interacting with it. It is
only when you consider that while one device misbehaving is tolerable,
it'd be a nightmare when you have 1000 or more devices doing the same
thing at the same time (and you're on call when it happens e.g. after
a power black out). After that, you start to care very much about a
minimum of baseline level of compliance with RFCs as well as it working
when it is plugged in at home. You also need to care about both that it
does and then how well it recovers from common types of failures e.g.
loss of and recovery from ADSL line sync.

Regards,
Mark.

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads