From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yb1-xb33.google.com (mail-yb1-xb33.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B5513B2A4 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 11:33:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb33.google.com with SMTP id n130so19328639yba.10 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:33:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=08NuPlDSllaxJOSv9a8bsr/p6hSbBEKhN72Vj0zSWPw=; b=aLYg5AQ3K1zXMhwx1YVnkzNjpOCCNOvFosi1W006iBDW0V90lD4kDYZGWrUoPo9uQr MTdJjgyh4/StOV2tLIand2Ovrci89JGaMdP+CfPB4zzQPioh04f7yl9TppTJxOS2w4nM oRhYhwvTPzXGPypqja03ZpcfpVe3fAjZXi+oOH394kJ3dzJBSZ2T+Sh72wyis6a238Yy HH65A548VO++2r7PoEY1GzohCu+/iOGK2CAFfMMj6+2ukXsByN2c3/RWrzVVXtOB+xlI J7Coh2CDDDKUr2/wvLPp6IHK6ulZUSEvu9aBiIGYeI+RZa50HNev1ES7LB/UgBCKwLDc p/Yw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=08NuPlDSllaxJOSv9a8bsr/p6hSbBEKhN72Vj0zSWPw=; b=c2GnVGcE4eeURVzUKd+f9dUvzMMF9Dkbj+F2yvFZAGGPga8AufONNDj1k/eHdEmoez 3caalpyVBeXig+AZ75nNyflUjKa8oqiuuXiklG9fE1CdTM5j44zJwNnddZwoOs5PVId8 nzvo7cXu3Mp9ADpMLOcj2+wihgMljT9N76zVXUuD1a3B1qj/II5O8a1w1jz44x005S4p 190UFzx7Qb/vpUEzNrNVwJ95iKvCbKHqkrrQgxLSqFGoVV1/BQakhAWxanxXWPsdvp1B 0yZangJNDc98jdUHwfF/98FeDXysBtbAvUVFItXu12iqux9OXXeprHkVu/5A+BQbvQk3 rX1A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0SCqPcRBuGbPnQuPDjPS0h348NoqhjDBWA4NH6JB9kUkthfXBN 3hl80v3EDUTO0DVg+Ef0eBdH1D6FTW+2Ff91k1x8iK766J4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6/tLY2zuHMMtEvkkvqnpfYNpJFZwsdERmJr8wwInLcB1H1i/0xgJgYWCcWluX6vvskPr10agYHXRUMt0uXOe0= X-Received: by 2002:a5b:2c6:0:b0:6c4:c6f:d158 with SMTP id h6-20020a5b02c6000000b006c40c6fd158mr38356565ybp.448.1666798404845; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 08:33:24 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: dan Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 09:33:13 -0600 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d5462505ebf1bee8" Subject: Re: [LibreQoS] how are you doing on ipv4 address supply? X-BeenThere: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Many ISPs need the kinds of quality shaping cake can do List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 15:33:25 -0000 --000000000000d5462505ebf1bee8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable we use RFC6598 addressing and CGNAT on the edge unless someone pays for an IP. Very slowly getting IPv6 implementation down. Poor CRM/Shaper support for it being a big struggle. Preseem+UISP for example requires that whatever is handling IPv6 PD be pollable from preseem so they can grab MAC:PD prefix and combine them. VISP has implemented this better recently but I haven't fully implemented yet, that's a goal for this month. We don't 'tunnel' ie no MPLS/VPLS, SRV6, EVPN right now. We technically do GRE tunneling, terragraph works just like OSPFv3 on IPv6 w/ GRE tunnels. Part of the reason not to tunnel is that we don't have a single headend, we have regional POPs and interconnections between so we can reduce outages caused by the POPs. Fully routed seems to only non-convoluted way to handle this. Not interested in a VRRP moving my tunnel endpoint addresses between regions, that's a mess. And so we route. On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 9:30 PM Dave Taht via LibreQoS < libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > in my continued rip-van-winkle, living in the third world (california) > way, I am curious as to how y'all are managing your > ipv4 address supply and if you are deploying ipv6 to any extent? > > In all this discussion of multi-gbit fiber, my own direct experience > is that AT&T's fiber rollout had very flaky ipv6, and more and more > services (like starlink) are appearing behind cgnats, which have their > own capex and opex costs. > > I see a lot of rfc1918 being used as the operational overlay > elsewhere, tons of tunnels, also. > > -- > This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work: > > https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-698136666= 5607352320-FXtz > Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC > _______________________________________________ > LibreQoS mailing list > LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos > --000000000000d5462505ebf1bee8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
we use RFC6598 addressing and CGNAT on the edge unless som= eone pays for an IP.=C2=A0 Very slowly getting IPv6 implementation down.=C2= =A0 Poor CRM/Shaper support for it being a big struggle.=C2=A0 Preseem+UISP= for example requires that whatever is handling IPv6 PD be pollable from pr= eseem so they can grab MAC:PD prefix and combine them.=C2=A0 VISP has imple= mented this better recently but I haven't fully implemented yet, that&#= 39;s a goal for this month.

We don't 'tunnel' ie no MPLS= /VPLS, SRV6, EVPN right now.=C2=A0 We technically do GRE tunneling, terragr= aph works just like OSPFv3 on IPv6 w/ GRE tunnels.=C2=A0=C2=A0

Part = of the reason not to tunnel is that we don't have a single headend, we = have regional POPs and interconnections between so we can reduce outages ca= used by the POPs.=C2=A0 Fully routed seems to only non-convoluted way to ha= ndle this.=C2=A0 Not interested in a VRRP moving my tunnel endpoint address= es between regions, that's a mess.=C2=A0 And so we route.

On Tue, Oct 25= , 2022 at 9:30 PM Dave Taht via LibreQoS <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
=
in my continued rip-van-w= inkle, living in the third world (california)
way, I am curious as to how y'all are managing your
ipv4 address supply and if you are deploying ipv6 to any extent?

In all this discussion of multi-gbit fiber, my own direct experience
is that AT&T's fiber rollout had very flaky ipv6, and more and more=
services (like starlink) are appearing behind cgnats, which have their
own capex and opex costs.

I see a lot of rfc1918 being used as the operational overlay
elsewhere, tons of tunnels, also.

--
This song goes out to all the folk that thought Stadia would work:
https://www.= linkedin.com/posts/dtaht_the-mushroom-song-activity-6981366665607352320-FXt= z
Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
_______________________________________________
LibreQoS mailing list
LibreQo= S@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
--000000000000d5462505ebf1bee8--