From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2d]) (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 8BD363B2A4 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 12:49:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2d.google.com with SMTP id o70so19666167yba.7 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 09:49:02 -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=BIEkIrfauT1CtuPQ/Yt1eQnfs6tojtTZ3pXOMB3TmnI=; b=JXv8BLwNXcLjURfd2au9wPeuzcGteAUf7YG81h1l+a2uzgCF0Y1Gfet3FmYBmmW8Ml cpaKFU1jYUzBG4I0Eq2ce4qlPxx+JYw3p0XcBXmtDrxS3vVZRrJMs3oNIHLVQ2LQCDs8 zqhfhnMo6s/2AURWxXQop56d1DUygQDUfABHvwlp6TrEdem8pd1U66aKYH9rLP1jA1DP sCuDpYlBQ6XzsJiyg02npdSDTI5CauCh92dZvbXT3VX6ZAlyAnLZqjRla80y9KGTaqY4 3ms7gSoJaC/2i137Koe4jPVZindgjkIezerULNwjy5HCE4m1UBrDoj13GOoktW6QCxRY XUgg== 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=BIEkIrfauT1CtuPQ/Yt1eQnfs6tojtTZ3pXOMB3TmnI=; b=0w6JrrwkbVX47fjOqYobDXANN3v0Rbuf3zOeeFr4NLfXoaj/Bb62EmubALOICrvd7c twadz2Rz8iSU4N0zC8wBeZPi0WIxkrX1Gdp2+1R1tC1KjJbT25Wtrcr9a+n3BYEv+q/n UmEw2SF7K8UiMjqqqNCiVATDq88LhaKNuaa/nJKQIpuqJyxT6DIHQ9OvOY2ozt4htHO8 s3S956s4kJl1GEXli10ocWGVOMJSgMup4Z/4N3I8U9cDMzdRS52lrntLSdfC4m9LL214 pNLlEo8Mku4+YBOkFtKyWcCrsuUjOFi9aJCVynO+LtqvzJnTK9xHjv2UPXuptYnJJ43V qd9A== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf3kZndQMSVJVRXtwCkBClqekOIoOLNX6RcEgQXuXgA7Jos9L1pm kk4aiiHW80sNIAFuih8wHyDOQjY1fxI98sR+3SM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4pcMMo5/cf7sUYq7ortX9DU+K/B+ZOw7zDx+ePBLZLCN5+RT51oLNDCgbX2l1to0sqzOSNIt8BTGHimgPKPcY= X-Received: by 2002:a5b:2c6:0:b0:6c4:c6f:d158 with SMTP id h6-20020a5b02c6000000b006c40c6fd158mr38659665ybp.448.1666802941856; Wed, 26 Oct 2022 09:49:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: dan Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 10:48:50 -0600 Message-ID: To: Herbert Wolverson Cc: libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000429d3605ebf2cd46" 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 16:49:02 -0000 --000000000000429d3605ebf2cd46 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MPLS is great for those that have dedicated engineering staff or hire a consultant to help out. It's a real PITA when the business is primarily techs and they have no idea how to solve an issue. I've been pushing for vxlan/evpn or srv6 for a while as a way to simplify the model. 'wisp' focused gear just isn't there yet though. high hopes for mikrotik's support for vxlan to get hardware acceleration. On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 10:05 AM Herbert Wolverson via LibreQoS < libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > Actually had a conversation with our primary upstream provider yesterday > about IPv6 (and why > they won't provide it to us). One of their lead engineers, once plied wit= h > beer, said that every > time they've deployed it they get 99% of it working well and 1% of things > mysteriously > stop working, or go wonky. That was similar to our experience a few years > ago. It mostly > helped a lot, but chasing down the "hey, this advertises a v6 address and > doesn't actually > support it" issues drove us crazy. > > Right now, we don't have enough IPv4 addresses, but that's being > rectified. We mostly > do CGNAT and 10.64 addresses in the meantime, with public IPs assigned > where they > are needed (mostly through a tunnel setup to avoid subnetting waste). > Tunnels are a pain, > but they work (once you chase down all of the MTU issues). > > Which reminds me, I have "can we support MPLS?" on my crazy notes list. I > know that > Preseem and similar don't try, but we're already reading deeply enough > into the ethernet > header that saying "this is an MPLS label, advance 4 bytes", "this is a > VPLS label, advance > X (I forget) bytes" looks do-able. [Note, I personally don't enjoy MPLS. > It's handy when > you want to pretend to have a flat network on top of a large routed > network - and some > WISP consultants absolutely swear by it - but my experience is that you > are adding > complexity for the sake of it. Routing works remarkably well.] > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 10:30 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-69813666= 65607352320-FXtz >> Dave T=C3=A4ht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >> _______________________________________________ >> LibreQoS mailing list >> LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos >> > _______________________________________________ > LibreQoS mailing list > LibreQoS@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos > --000000000000429d3605ebf2cd46 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MPLS is great for those that have dedicated engineering st= aff or hire a consultant to help out.=C2=A0 It's a real PITA when the b= usiness is primarily techs and they have no idea how to solve an issue.=C2= =A0 =C2=A0I've been pushing for vxlan/evpn or srv6 for a while as a way= to simplify the model.=C2=A0 'wisp' focused gear just isn't th= ere yet though.=C2=A0 high hopes for mikrotik's support for vxlan to ge= t hardware acceleration.=C2=A0 =C2=A0

<= div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 10:05 AM Herbe= rt Wolverson via LibreQoS <libreqos@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
Actually had a con= versation with our primary upstream provider yesterday about IPv6 (and why<= /div>
they won't provide it to us). One of their lead engineers, on= ce plied with beer, said that every
time they've deployed it = they get 99% of it working well and 1% of things mysteriously
sto= p working, or go wonky. That was similar to our experience a few years ago.= It mostly
helped a lot, but chasing down the "hey, this adv= ertises a v6 address and doesn't actually
support it" is= sues drove us crazy.

Right now, we don't have = enough IPv4 addresses, but that's being rectified. We mostly
= do CGNAT and 10.64 addresses in the meantime, with public IPs assigned wher= e they
are needed (mostly through a tunnel setup to avoid subnett= ing waste). Tunnels are a pain,
but they work (once you chase dow= n all of the MTU issues).

Which reminds me, I have= "can we support MPLS?" on my crazy notes list. I know that
=
Preseem and similar don't try, but we're already reading deepl= y enough into the ethernet
header that saying "this is an MP= LS label, advance 4 bytes", "this is a VPLS label, advance
<= div>X (I forget) bytes" looks do-able. [Note, I personally don't e= njoy MPLS. It's handy when
you want to pretend to have a flat= network on top of a large routed network - and some
WISP consult= ants absolutely swear by it - but my experience is that you are adding
complexity for the sake of it. Routing works remarkably well.]

On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 10:30 PM Dave Taht via LibreQoS <libreqos@lists.buff= erbloat.net> wrote:
in my continued rip-van-winkle, living in the third world (calif= ornia)
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
_______________________________________________
LibreQoS mailing list
LibreQo= S@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/libreqos
--000000000000429d3605ebf2cd46--