Today I got an e-mail from Jeroen Massaar, head honcjo of SixXs. here is
a quote from that e-mail:
December 2015[6]. We are now fully stopping accepting signups and tunnel
& subnet requests. We'll also be starting to ratelimit IPv4 speeds on
the PoPs to make sure that you notice that the freebie that is SixXS
will not stay around forever.
Paul Hayton wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
That's telling it like it is.... well I have no hope any time soon of getting either of the two national ISPs here to offer IPv6 and I have asked both several times. I hope SixXs is not going to penalise those users that don't really have any option other than to use a tunnel.
Dunno how that would work, but money is probably the thing needed to
push them into adopting IPv6 - have to somehow make it more profitable
to offer IPv6 to the general population as part of their standard
service.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Lack of a bussines case for IPv6 has been the main reason why ISPs have been dragging their feet for so long. My guess is that the only way to get them moving is to convince them that they will loose customers if they don't.
The problem there is 95% or more of customers have never heard of IPv6, let
alone know what it is and why they would want it. :(
Bjrn Felten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Same here (in Sweden). Strange really, now that we get more and more
of internet of things. I even guess that my next fridge will have WiFi
-- my TV already has and I'm using it to the limit.
And then you get IPv6, nothing really changes for the casual user, you actually have to check to see that it's working. :)
Lack of a bussines case for IPv6 has been the main reason whyThe problem there is 95% or more of customers have never heard of
ISPs have been dragging their feet for so long. My guess is that
the only way to get them moving is to convince them that they
will loose customers if they don't.
IPv6, let alone know what it is and why they would want it. :(
The situation here is similar. I just chose my ISP carefully (ask
fellow geeks ;) ), which meant I ended up with native IPv6 years ago,
but the majority of users in the country still don't have it. There needs to be IPv6 solutions for those stranded by slack ISPs, maybe
free for the user and billed to the offending ISPs? ;) Dunno how that would work, but money is probably the thing needed to push them into adopting IPv6 - have to somehow make it more profitable to offer IPv6
to the general population as part of their standard service.
The problem there is 95% or more of customers have never heard of
IPv6, let alone know what it is and why they would want it. :(
I could get it natively, but only at the price of going DS-Lite, and loosing my public v4 address.
I am not willing to do that.
Markus Reschke wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Actually it's very simple. Any Internet access without IPv6 isn't a
full Internet access anymore. The local telecommunications regulation should enforce that an Internet access has to support IPv4 and IPv6.
Any ISP not providing IPv6 or demanding some extra fee for that should
be ashamed. They all had more than sufficient time to enable IPv6 in
their networks. Now, that ARIN only got a few IPv4 /24s left, there's
no excuse to postpone IPv6 any longer. Name and shame those morons! Explain to people that they need IPv6 and demand it from your telcos!
I could get it natively, but only at the price of going DS-Lite, and
loosing my public v4 address.
I am not willing to do that.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-
I fully understand. Th irony is that those who are aware of IPv6, the geeks, are also the ones who are very reluctant to let go of their
public IP4 address yet. Auntie Mildred and uncle Harry may be quit satisfied with Ds-lite and they may never notice that their IPv4 connection is not an end to end connection. But we want full dual
stack. For now at least.
That is why I say the ISPs should have rolled out IPv6 five years ago. Back then there was no shortage of IPv4 yet and they could have given everyone dual stack. Had they started five years ago, the child
diseases would have been fixed and the whole world or at least the largest part would have been on IPv6, so that the most of the guys like us would not need a public IPv4 address any more.
We now have 42 IPv6 capable nodes in Fidonet. If the situation were the reverse: i.e. there were only 42 nodes that could not be reached using IPv6, then I could do without a public IPv4 address and happily live
with a DS-Lite connection.
As it is, it seems I am one of the few lucky ones that will still get a dual stack connection. Here two major cable companies UPC and Ziggo
have done a merger. The continue undert the name of Ziggo. Ipv6 is
being rolled out. But here is difference between the region formerly covered by UPC and the region covered by the old Ziggo. Former UPC gets DS-lite, former Ziggo gets dual stack. I am in the old Ziggo region.
Ziggo has been telling they will roll out IPv6 "later this year"for the last five years. Itseem that now they are actual;ly doing it and I have
a little bit of hope that "this year" will actually be 2016.
December 2015[6]. We are now fully stopping accepting signups and
tunnel & subnet requests. We'll also be starting to ratelimit
IPv4 speeds on the PoPs to make sure that you notice that the
freebie that is SixXS will not stay around forever.
That's telling it like it is....
well I have no hope any time soon of getting either of the two
national ISPs here to offer IPv6 and I have asked both several times.
I hope SixXs is not going to penalise those users that don't really
have any option other than to use a tunnel.
Actually it's very simple. Any Internet access without IPv6 isn't a
full Internet access anymore. The local telecommunications regulation should enforce that an Internet access has to support IPv4 and IPv6.
Any ISP not providing IPv6 or demanding some extra fee for that should
be ashamed. They all had more than sufficient time to enable IPv6 in
their networks. Now, that ARIN only got a few IPv4 /24s left, there's
no excuse to postpone IPv6 any longer.
Name and shame those morons! Explain to people that they need IPv6 and demand it from your telcos!
IPv6 is not a business case, it's an intrinsic feature to be able to
use the Internet. If those management morons don't get it, fix it by regulation.
The problem there is 95% or more of customers have never heard of IPv6, let
alone know what it is and why they would want it. :(
Same here (in Sweden). Strange really, now that we get more and
more of internet of things. I even guess that my next fridge will
have WiFi -- my TV already has and I'm using it to the limit.
A clever ISP/telco would offer an IPv4 address as option for geeks, if they don't got enough IPv4 address space for all customers. The other
99% of the customers will be happy with DS-lite.
Geeks want everything, and by the looks of it, I could be needing to
have a public IPv4 for at least 10 years more, because one class of applications, in particular, is very slow to adopt IPv6, namely ham
radio software.
Very little of it knows what IPv6 is. The only one
that I know of is Asterisk (used in AllStar and VKLink).
IRLP, Echolink, D-STAR, etc all require a public IPv4 address to
function properly (often port forwarding will work).
That is why I say the ISPs should have rolled out IPv6 five
years ago. Back then there was no shortage of IPv4 yet and they
could have given everyone dual stack. Had they started five
years ago, the child diseases would have been fixed and the
whole world or at least the largest part would have been on
IPv6, so that the most of the guys like us would not need a
public IPv4 address any more.
Well, my ISP _did_ roll out IPv6 5 years ago. Admitedly, it was on
trial at the time (but went production only months later)
We now have 42 IPv6 capable nodes in Fidonet. If the situation
were the reverse: i.e. there were only 42 nodes that could not be
reached using IPv6, then I could do without a public IPv4 address
and happily live with a DS-Lite connection.
At this stage, I can initiate and accept mailer sessions (which is
enough for Fidonet to worry about ;) ) on IPv6.
Waiting for the next software update for the BBS itself (the author
says IPv6 support is due in the next release :) ) to be IPv6 capable.
My ISP has no plans to phase out public IPv4 addresses. Even my iPad
on 3G gets a public IPv4 address from them,
mobile public IPv4 is quite rare these days.
Ziggo has been telling they will roll out IPv6 "later this
year" for the last five years. Itseem that now they are actual;ly
doing it and I have a little bit of hope that "this year" will
actually be 2016.
Let's hope so. :)
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Lack of a bussines case for IPv6 has been the main reason why
ISPs have been dragging their feet for so long. My guess is that
the only way to get them moving is to convince them that they
will loose customers if they don't.
The problem there is 95% or more of customers have never heard of
IPv6, let alone know what it is and why they would want it. :(
... Casserole is just another word for leftovers.
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
* Origin: Freeway BBS - freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
Name and shame those morons! Explain to people that they need IPv6
and demand it from your telcos!
Hello Tony.
02 Apr 16 12:17, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Some ISP's (At least mine) are a tad behind regarding IPv6 too.
Last time I talked to my ISP's tech support regarding IPv6
availibility I had the impression that I was providing them more
knowledge than I was getting from them.
Maybe IPv6 could be squeezed into the net neutrality discussion. If an
ISP doesn't forward IPv6 packets it's a violation of net neutrality.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hello Tony,
On Saturday April 02 2016 23:42, you wrote to me:
Geeks want everything, and by the looks of it, I could be needing to
have a public IPv4 for at least 10 years more, because one class of applications, in particular, is very slow to adopt IPv6, namely ham
radio software.
The irony is that an entire /8 has been reserved for Amateur Radio Digital Communications, but AFAIK was never used as such. (044/8) http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xh tm
I have never used any of these applications, I played iwth Packet
Radio, but that was AX25, not TCP/IP.
But... should not the same that we are critisizing the ISPs for, also apply to the authors of that software. They too had plenty of time and could have seen it coming. They should be ashamed and be punished by their software being thrown in the bit bucket.
At this stage, I can initiate and accept mailer sessions (which is
enough for Fidonet to worry about ;) ) on IPv6.
So Fidonet is saved. ;-)
Waiting for the next software update for the BBS itself (the author
says IPv6 support is due in the next release :) ) to be IPv6 capable.
The introduction of metered local calls around 1990 is what killed the BBS in this part of the world. It was a great incentive for users to become points. The last user spotted in the wild was around 1996. Users are a virtually extinct species here. Most sysops closed their BBS and went mail only. So... BBS's not supporting IPv6 is not an issue of concern here...
My ISP has no plans to phase out public IPv4 addresses. Even my iPad
on 3G gets a public IPv4 address from them,
Lucky for you.
mobile public IPv4 is quite rare these days.
Here all the mobile providers have stopped issuing public IPv4 adresses years ago. I have a 3G dongle from KPN for my laptop and i get a
RFC1918 or RFC 9598 adress. No IPv6.
Ziggo has been telling they will roll out IPv6 "later this
year" for the last five years. Itseem that now they are actual;ly
doing it and I have a little bit of hope that "this year" will
actually be 2016.
Let's hope so. :)
I am not holding my breath...
Jeff Smith wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Some ISP's (At least mine) are a tad behind regarding IPv6 too. Last
time I talked to my ISP's tech support regarding IPv6 availibility I
had the impression that I was providing them more knowledge than I was getting from them.
Markus Reschke wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
A clever ISP/telco would offer an IPv4 address as option for geeks, if they don't got enough IPv4 address space for all customers. The other
99% of the customers will be happy with DS-lite.
Jeff Smith wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Some ISP's (At least mine) are a tad behind regarding IPv6 too.
Last time I talked to my ISP's tech support regarding IPv6
availibility I had the impression that I was providing them more
knowledge than I was getting from them.
That sounds like the majority of support calls I have with most ISPs.
The ISP I'm with are an exception, you can skip the baby steps with
them and talk about the nitty gritty details of a problem (and they
are very good at getting things done).
... hAS ANYONE SEEN MY cAPSLOCK KEY?
--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
* Origin: Freeway BBS - freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
Jeff Smith wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I found that my ISP has several tiers of support. The first level that
a user reaches always seem to be reading what they are saying and the questions that they are asking. In short order I just started asking
them to connect me to a higher tier of support right from the start.
But recently when I inquired about the availability of native IPv6
support I was transfered several times and then still didn't get a specific answer. For now they are actually providing 6RD support to customers.
Maybe IPv6 could be squeezed into the net neutrality discussion. If
an ISP doesn't forward IPv6 packets it's a violation of net
neutrality.
I could get it natively, but only at the price of going DS-Lite,I fully understand.
and loosing my public v4 address.
I am not willing to do that.
But we want full dual stack. For now at least.
As it is, it seems I am one of the few lucky ones that will still get
a dual stack connection. Here two major cable companies UPC and Ziggo
have done a merger. The continue undert the name of Ziggo. Ipv6 is
being rolled out. But here is difference between the region formerly covered by UPC and the region covered by the old Ziggo. Former UPC
gets DS-lite, former Ziggo gets dual stack. I am in the old Ziggo
region.
Ziggo has been telling they will roll out IPv6 "later this year"for
the last five years. Itseem that now they are actual;ly doing it and I have a little bit of hope that "this year" will actually be 2016.
A clever ISP/telco would offer an IPv4 address as option for geeks, if they don't got enough IPv4 address space for all customers. The other
99% of the customers will be happy with DS-lite.
We have run out of IPv4 addresses, but they are not burned like
oil. It means we can't get any more new ones, but the old ones are
still there. I have an IPv4 address now, I see no compelling logistic reason why I could not keep it forever.
The irony is that an entire /8 has been reserved for Amateur Radio
Digital Communications, but AFAIK was never used as such. (044/8) http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space. xhtm
mobile public IPv4 is quite rare these days.Here all the mobile providers have stopped issuing public IPv4
adresses years ago. I have a 3G dongle from KPN for my laptop and i
get a RFC1918 or RFC 9598 adress. No IPv6.
I could get it natively, but only at the price of going DS-Lite,
and loosing my public v4 address.
I am not willing to do that.
I fully understand.
I really do not understand why they do not throw in IPv6 in the mix
... But that is how it is :(
But we want full dual stack. For now at least.
Indeed!
As it is, it seems I am one of the few lucky ones that will still
get a dual stack connection. Here two major cable companies UPC
and Ziggo have done a merger. The continue undert the name of
Ziggo. Ipv6 is being rolled out. But here is difference between
the region formerly covered by UPC and the region covered by the
old Ziggo. Former UPC gets DS-lite, former Ziggo gets dual stack.
I am in the old Ziggo region.
I am at UPC Austria ... this is a DS-Lite only area :(
Ziggo has been telling they will roll out IPv6 "later this
year" for the last five years. Itseem that now they are actual;ly
doing it and I have a little bit of hope that "this year" will
actually be 2016.
I am holding my fingers crossed!
UPC Austria converts IPv4 connections to DS-Lite!
Without asking ... and without warning.
When you complain and they are in a good mood, they will convert you
back ...
I have one at home (inet addr:44.143.24.52)
Most of them are allocated for HAMNet (eg. the above).
But some are also routed to the "real" Internet (eg. some EchoLink
Proxies in that range)
mobile public IPv4 is quite rare these days.
Here all the mobile providers have stopped issuing public IPv4
adresses years ago. I have a 3G dongle from KPN for my laptop and
i get a RFC1918 or RFC 9598 adress. No IPv6.
I *DO* have a dynamic IPv4 on my mobile. (Hitchison 3g)
Most other companies use carrier grade NAT and private address space.
But as usual the broadband providers are slow to adapt. IP guru
Jeff Doyle wrote an article about D-S Lite in Network World already in 2009.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-
DS-Lite is cheaper and simpler in the long run than dual stack because they only have to maintain an IPv6 only core network. When they annouce the transition to DS-Lite, the helpdesk will be flooded. When they silently move to DS-Lite, only a small minority of the customers will notice and and an even smaller part of them will complain and want a public IPv4 address.
Bjrn Felten wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
MvdV> Only the CPE and the gateway to the IPv4 internet need stuff to
MvdV> tunnel/detunnel the IPv4 packets.
True. Unfortunately it also means that two IPv4 hosts can not
connect. A real problem for all the fido systems that still haven't
seen the light, I'd say.
The time is running out...
Would be telling what proportion of the total that the 42
known IPv6 capable nodes represents.
Would be telling what proportion of the total that the 42
known IPv6 capable nodes represents.
True. Unfortunately it also means that two IPv4 hosts can not
connect. A real problem for all the fido systems that still haven't
seen the light, I'd say.
The time is running out...
Would be telling what proportion of the total that the 42
known IPv6 capable nodes represents.
I spoke too soon in my previous comment. I just remembered that the only FidoWeb nod in zone 3 is not IPv6 ready.
The time is running out...
Bjrn Felten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Would be telling what proportion of the total that the 42
known IPv6 capable nodes represents.
That seems like a task that not even our trusted nodelist checker
Kees can accomplish.
But at least we know that the entire(?) FidoWeb is already IPv6
ready, so we have a sturdy mail backbone up, ready and working since a long time ago. 8-)
Bjrn Felten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I spoke too soon in my previous comment. I just remembered that the only FidoWeb nod in zone 3 is not IPv6 ready. But you are. How about connecting to a dozen nodes with every echo there is?
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Bjrn Felten <=-
Indeed, it is. But what we are critizising the ISPs for, also applies
to the Fidonet sysops. They can't claim they didn't see it coming.
There has been enough publicity. In Fidonews and other publications.
The software to run FOTIPv6 has been available for quit some time. And
if the ISP does not offer IPv6, one can run a tunnel. Installing a
tunnel should be within the capabalities of every Fidonet sysop. So
when they are left behind because they are saddled with a crippled IPv4 connection and have no IPv6, they only have themselves to blame.
Hmm, tongue in cheek? ;)
Bjrn Felten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hmm, tongue in cheek? ;)
My old trusted friends down under knows that I always have my tongue there. Just ask David or Paul if you don't believe me... 8-)
So, what is the Fidoweb? Obviously some specialised part of Fidonet.
So, what is the Fidoweb? Obviously some specialised part of Fidonet.
Would be telling what proportion of the total that the 42
known IPv6 capable nodes represents.
That seems like a task that not even our trusted nodelist checker Kees can accomplish.
That's exactly what I was thinking of.
Some sysops take this seriously and have taken the proper precautions. Some are just sitting on their thumbs and are quite happy to cry for a moderator election somewhere. 8-)
There are many that will not have IPv6 for ages to come. It does not matter how much they may clamour for it, the ISP is just not
interested.
My former ISP could care less.
I do agree about running a tunnel. I've run tunnels on and off since around 2000,
when it was _much_ harder to do so, as it required compiling Linux
kernels by hand, experimental patches from Microsoft for Windows 2000,
and some odd configuration to work around various bugs in those early implementations (like the default route not working on Linux!).
There are many that will not have IPv6 for ages to come. It does
not matter how much they may clamour for it, the ISP is just not
interested.
As pointed out before, one does not have to wait for the ISP to support it. Setting up a tunnel should be within the capabilities of every Fidonet sysop.
My former ISP could care less.
Then the days of that ISP are numbered. My estimate is that within five years, IPv6 will be the dominant protocol on the Internet. Those who do not have IPv6 will miss out on certain things.
You made the right choice.--- SBBSecho 2.33-Win32
As pointed out before, one does not have to wait for the ISP to
support it. Setting up a tunnel should be within the capabilities
of every Fidonet sysop.
But with tunnel brokers starting to shut down that service that looks rather bleak as well.
Then the days of that ISP are numbered. My estimate is that
within five years, IPv6 will be the dominant protocol on the
Internet. Those who do not have IPv6 will miss out on certain
things.
Since it is pretty much the largest ISP in this country, I dont think
they will go away anytime soon.
They and the other big two ISPs tend to control the market, and either surpress, or buy out startups.
Even though I am no longer with them, I still have to use their lines,
and switches, and they control how big a bandwidth I get or the speed
at which I can transfer files.
But with tunnel brokers starting to shut down that service that
looks rather bleak as well.
Oh, c'mon. There is just one tunnel broker, that MAY shut down. It is not the only fish in the sea. he.net comes to mind and they show no signs of quitting ant time soon. And there are others.
Since it is pretty much the largest ISP in this country, I dont
think they will go away anytime soon.
Don't put any money on that. If they do not start with IPv6 soon, they will be out of the race within five years.
They and the other big two ISPs tend to control the market, and
either surpress, or buy out startups.
Watch what happens when large parts of the Internet become unreacheable by their customers.
--- SBBSecho 2.33-Win32Even though I am no longer with them, I still have to use their
lines, and switches, and they control how big a bandwidth I get or
the speed at which I can transfer files.
Hmm.. Not so good. :(
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
On Tuesday April 05 2016 11:34, you wrote to Bjrn Felten:
So, what is the Fidoweb? Obviously some specialised part of Fidonet.
That is a subject that is off-topic in this area.
For info see my article in Fidonews titled:
Notes on a topless echomail distribution system.
Late September or beginning of October 2012.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hello Tony,
On Tuesday April 05 2016 11:39, you wrote to me:
I do agree about running a tunnel. I've run tunnels on and off since around 2000,
That early? Wow, you really are an early adopter. ;-)
when it was _much_ harder to do so, as it required compiling Linux
kernels by hand, experimental patches from Microsoft for Windows 2000,
and some odd configuration to work around various bugs in those early implementations (like the default route not working on Linux!).
I am impressed. :)
Kees van Eeten wrote to Bjrn Felten <=-
IP adresses listed in the nodelist are added to the second group.
No attempt is made to verify if the systems are live.
Below Group 1 is separated into Zones.
Group 1 total Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4
NXdomain 116 41 63 0 12
Group 2 total Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4
IPv4 Nodes - 878 260 589 17 12
Group 3 total Z1 Z2 Z3 Z4
IPv6 Nodes - 87 26 48 12 1
Not all nodes with hostnames, that return IPv6 addresses support IPv6.
A comparison with the list of IPv6 capable nodes in the Nodelist is a job
for another day.
For info see my article in Fidonews titled:
Notes on a topless echomail distribution system.
Late September or beginning of October 2012.
OK, seems to be something more here, if I can get around to finding an
old issue of Fidonews, I will read it, but no guarantee (you're
relying on my extremely dodgy short term memory here, so not really helpful. ;)
So, depending on how you analyse the stats, we're looking at maybe 4 -
9% of nodes have IPv6 capability.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
http://vlist.org/downloads/fidonews/nads.txt
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Hello Tony,
On Wednesday April 06 2016 09:01, you wrote to Kees van Eeten:
So, depending on how you analyse the stats, we're looking at maybe 4 -
9% of nodes have IPv6 capability.
Which compared to the global stats of IPv6 connectivity is not all that bad.
OTOH, one would expect the fidonet community to be above avarage, given that they were pioneers in datacomm...
I really do not understand why they do not throw in IPv6 in theI think I can understand it. They are actually thinking ahead. An IPv6 only network is less complicated than a dual stack network. And in the
mix ... But that is how it is :(
end hat is what we will end up with anyway. So why not go for an IPv6
only core network and as a transtion mechanism offer IPv4 via a
tunneling mechanism?
But we want full dual stack. For now at least.
Indeed!As my fellow countryman, ex fidonet sysop and IPv6 Guru Iljitsch van Beijnum remarked in his essays: the transition will be ugly... :-(
I am at UPC Austria ... this is a DS-Lite only area :(So let me ask you and think about this carefully: how much would it
really hurt you to go DS-Lite? How much do you really need a public
IPv4 address? If push comes to shove, how much would you be willing to
pay for it?
I have one at home (inet addr:44.143.24.52)It doesn't ping.
Most of them are allocated for HAMNet (eg. the above).If it is not routed on the public internet than it serves no purpose
But some are also routed to the "real" Internet (eg. some
EchoLink Proxies in that range)
to use a public address, Might as well use address in one of the
RFC1918 ranges.
Actually, as a technology, DS-Lite has merits. It has the great
advantage over dual stack that the core network can be IPv6 only. An
IPv6 only network is much simpler than a dual stack network. So,easier
to maintain, easier to debug and therefore cheaper.
Actually, as a technology, DS-Lite has merits. It has the great
advantage over dual stack that the core network can be IPv6 only.
An IPv6 only network is much simpler than a dual stack network.
So,easier to maintain, easier to debug and therefore cheaper.
Just that they need to maintain the IPv4 backbone for the customers
that have old CPEs like my bridged Ubee CPE.
Or those that called the hotline and were configured for bridged
IPv4.
So they need to maintain it anyhow ...
As my fellow countryman, ex fidonet sysop and IPv6 Guru Iljitsch
van Beijnum remarked in his essays: the transition will be
ugly... :-(
And late ;)
Wrote mythesis about mobile IPv6 in 2004 ...
So let me ask you and think about this carefully: how much would
it really hurt you to go DS-Lite? How much do you really need a
public IPv4 address? If push comes to shove, how much would you
be willing to pay for it?
No IPv6 in the office, no IPv6 with many people, and most Fido nodes.
I discussed that very point with the network architect of a big ISP,
who was looking into PCP. I told him that offering IPv4 for 1
EUR/month makes much more sense ... I would be willing to pay that to
get dual stack. PCP is a very braindead "solution" for DS-Lite port forwarding ...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Richard Menedetter <=-
That early? I think my interest in IPv6 war aroused in 2006 or 2007.
But it tool a while before I started experimenting myself.
EUR 1 a month... Yes, I'd be prepared to pay that. For the next five years. At which point I expect to no longer need IPv4.
Wrote mythesis about mobile IPv6 in 2004 ...That early? I think my interest in IPv6 war aroused in 2006 or 2007.
But it tool a while before I started experimenting myself.
EUR 1 a month... Yes, I'd be prepared to pay that.
For the next five years. At which point I expect to no longer need
IPv4.
Richard Menedetter wrote to Michiel Van Der Vlist <=-
Was playing around with 6bone in 2001ish ...
EUR 1 a month... Yes, I'd be prepared to pay that. For the next
five years. At which point I expect to no longer need IPv4.
Sounds a reasonable price to pay, in fact, on the cheap side.
I expect to need IPv4 for at least 10 years, despite being an early adopter of IPv6, because of some of the applications which I run and
don't expect to see updated for a long time.
Was playing around with 6bone in 2001ish ...
Here is the abstract for my thesis: http://pub-et.tuwien.ac.at/showentry.php?ID=110024&lang=2
EUR 1 a month... Yes, I'd be prepared to pay that.
For the next five years. At which point I expect to no longer
need IPv4.
Or for however long you deem it useful ;)
Well, I suppose I can afford EUR 1 a month for the second five year
period if needed. But I realy expect not to need it any more by then.
Here is the abstract for my thesis:Thanks. I will read it on the next rainy day.. ;-)
http://pub-et.tuwien.ac.at/showentry.php?ID=110024&lang=2
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to All <=-
It has now been confirmed: My ISP, Ziggo now puts all new customers on DS-Lite. Presumably one can still get IPv4 only with a public address
on request, but not Dual Stack.
I still have Dual Stack. I foresee it won't last forever...
Hi Michiel,
On 2017-08-07 14:11:55, you wrote to All:
If you have to choose between DS-lite and IPv4 only, what will it be?
;)
If you have to choose between DS-lite and IPv4 only, what will it be?
If you have to choose between DS-lite and IPv4 only, what will
it be?
Right now I would probably choose IPv4 (if it was a static address).
I'm running more servers (www, mail) than just binkp.
Right now I would probably choose IPv4 (if it was a static address).
I'm running more servers (www, mail) than just binkp.
# telnet de8.portmap64.net binkp
Trying 84.200.67.208...
Connected to de8.portmap64.net.
ߙ.OPT CRAM-MD5-c48a96e544fb4a3c5aca5faa4be033eeߙSYS Blijf
TonijnߙZYZ Michiel van der VlistߙLOC Driebergen, NLߙ0NDL CM,MO,IBN:fido.vlist.eu,RPK,NPK,ENC,NC,PINGߙ%TIME Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:23:11 +0200ߙ"VER binkd/1.1a-95/Win32 binkp/1.1ߙ2
2:280/5555@fidonet 2:2/20@fidonet 2:28/0@fidonet
Ok, that works (for now). But it depends on a (free?) service provided
by a third party. And has some limitations.
If you have no choice, it is (very) usefull.
But I don't think I would prefer it over a static IPv4 address right
now.
Ok, that works (for now). But it depends on a (free?) service
provided by a third party. And has some limitations.
If you have no choice, it is (very) usefull.
But I don't think I would prefer it over a static IPv4 address right
now.
Ok, that works (for now). But it depends on a (free?) service
provided by a third party. And has some limitations.
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much more) yourself.
That wouldn't be a show stopper. ;)
Untill they find it's not profitable and quit the service or make the prices a lot higher. ;)
Maybe in the future, right now I wouldn't absolutely need IPv6. I
think I can do without it.
They'll try to prevent that, because that will cost them customers.
Their "geek friendly" image is how they distinquish themselfs from the others.
If they don't have that, there are probably cheeper ones that provide
the same product and service level.
Of course. ;)
Maybe in the future, right now I wouldn't absolutely need IPv6. I
think I can do without it.
They'll try to prevent that, because that will cost them customers.
Their "geek friendly" image is how they distinquish themselfs from
the others.
Right now I would probably choose IPv4 (if it was a static
address). I'm running more servers (www, mail) than just binkp.
Try connecting to my binkp server at de8.portmap64.net.
I still have Dual Stack. I foresee it won't last forever...
We should plan for that. Having as many *Cs and hubs as possible
running dual stack will help, at least that will allow routed netmail
as worst case cenario.
Well you want a port for your webserver too. So maybe it's 10/y. Still
not too expensive.
I highly doubt that...
Then they will fold up the business all together, or sell it to
someone else. It's still an independent "daughter".
It was probably smaller...
Try connecting to my binkp server at de8.portmap64.net.
It's not especially surprising to see such services appearing.
I highly doubt that...
Then they will fold up the business all together, or sell it to
someone else. It's still an independent "daughter".
Ok, that works (for now). But it depends on a (free?) service
provided by a third party. And has some limitations.
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much more)
yourself.
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because I have the experience to do that...
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much more)
yourself.
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because I have
the experience to do that...
That would most probably be my choice as well. It would be a safe
place to run a Fido server.
Only Pots would then be a thing of the past, but you probably don't
care.
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much
more) yourself.
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because IThat would most probably be my choice as well. It would be a safe
have the experience to do that...
place to run a Fido server. Only Pots would then be a thing of the
past, but you probably don't care.
That would most probably be my choice as well. It would be a safe
place to run a Fido server. Only Pots would then be a thing of the
past, but you probably don't care.
You can still connect your POTS to a modem and share your inbound/outbound via NFS/CIFS/GlusterFS/SSHFS/whatever. At least that's the way I want to connect my modem to my server.
Hi Michiel, On 2017-08-07 14:11:55, you wrote to All:MvdV>> It has now been confirmed: My ISP, Ziggo now puts all new
If you have to choose between DS-lite and IPv4 only, what will it
be? ;)
Hello Wilfred, On Tuesday August 08 2017 09:53, you wrote to me:MvdV>>> DS-Lite
If you have to choose between DS-lite and IPv4 only, what will
it be?
Right now I would probably choose IPv4 (if it was a staticTry connecting to my binkp server at de8.portmap64.net.
address). I'm running more servers (www, mail) than just binkp.
Hi Kees, On 2017-08-08 15:40:30, you wrote to me:
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much
more) yourself.
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because I
have the experience to do that...
That would most probably be my choice as well. It would be aOr use it to forward binkp connections... But running your
safe place to run a Fido server.
fidosystem in it makes sense too...
They offer a dedicated static IPv4 too. For a fee.
Maybe, I don't know how much they have left, and how much bigger they
have to grow to run out.
And if they do, there will probably be a choice just for new
customers. I don't think they will take it away from existing
customers.
That's what they call it...
That would most probably be my choice as well. It would be a safe
place to run a Fido server. Only Pots would then be a thing of the
past, but you probably don't care.
It was not eaten by KPN, there were some unlucky decisions made by management of HCC. In the end it was a better solution to sell the business to the geek friendly daughter company of KPN. I am still glad they did as in the end the first concept was unsustainable.
You can still connect your POTS to a modem and share your
inbound/outbound via NFS/CIFS/GlusterFS/SSHFS/whatever. At least
that's the way I want to connect my modem to my server.
Try connecting to my binkp server at de8.portmap64.net.
Quite nice... But I can do the same with my VPS. I have a virtual
server with one static ipv4 and ipv6 address. And it costs only 3.70
per month.
They offer a dedicated static IPv4 too. For a fee.
It took my ISP this long to have native IPv6, so who knows when
they're going to ditch IPv4. But when they do, I'll gladly go native
IPv6 only without any complaints.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I don't know what "we" can do any more than we are already doing... trying to promote IPv6 in Fidonet...
Ok, that works (for now). But it depends on a (free?) service provided
by a third party. And has some limitations.
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
MvdV> I expect many people will have no choice in the not too distant foreseeable
MvdV> future. Even you with your geek friendly ISP may have no choice some day.
They'll try to prevent that, because that will cost them customers.
Their "geek friendly" image is how they distinquish themselfs from the others. If they don't have that, there are probably cheeper ones that provide the same product and service level.
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Markus Reschke <=-
You could rent an inexpensive vserver and do that (and much more)
yourself.
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because I have the experience to do that...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-
My once geek friendly ISP, hccnet, did not survive being eaten by
KPN...
If they don't have that, there are probably cheeper ones that provide
the same product and service level.
Probably...
MvdV>> They offer a dedicated static IPv4 too. For a fee.
Of course. ;)
Let's hope that by the time you can't have a fixed IPv4 addres from
your present ISP any more, it won't matter.
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
Then they will fold up the business all together, or sell it to someone else. It's still an independent "daughter".
Andrew Leary wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
It's not especially surprising to see such services appearing.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
Indeed, it was to be expected. This portmapper of theirs is real easy
to configure. Much easier than setting up a VPN or a fully fledged tunnel. I think it is a good solution if you only need one or a few ports.
Like for running a binkp server...
They'll try to prevent that, because that will cost them customers.
Their "geek friendly" image is how they distinquish themselfs from
the others. If they don't have that, there are probably cheeper ones
that provide the same product and service level.
Sounds a bit like my ISP - geek friendly, has a strong positive reputation among geeks (which is why I chose them), definitely not the cheapest - a little more expensive than most others, but definitely worth the premium. :)
That would probably be a more likely choice for me, because I have
the experience to do that...
I thought about doing that, but I went with APANA, a club of fellow networking geeks who do the tunneling for a reasonable fee. :)
Then they will fold up the business all together, or sell it to
someone else. It's still an independent "daughter".
Your ISP sounds a lot like mine - now owned by a much larger company, but maintain their independent operating.
Well, my BBSs use a VPN tunnel to bring in IPv4s from another network. While I do have a static IPv4, I got the tunnel to allow multiple
systems to run with public IPv4 addresses. All I would have to do if
I was forced onto DS-Lite (highly unlikely in at least the next 5
years), is to change the tunnel endpoints to IPv6.
It's not especially surprising to see such services appearing.
Indeed, and also good to see they have an IPv6 DDNS service too.
Indeed, it was to be expected. This portmapper of theirs is real
easy to configure. Much easier than setting up a VPN or a fully
fledged tunnel. I think it is a good solution if you only need
one or a few ports.
Like for running a binkp server...
Biggest issue is their key configuration page are only in German. :(
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Sounds a bit like my ISP - geek friendly, has a strong positive reputation among geeks (which is why I chose them), definitely not the cheapest - a little more expensive than most others, but definitely worth the premium. :)
Exactly the same here... ;)
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
But I think apana.org is the one you mentioned... ;)
But I think apana.org is the one you mentioned... ;)
My origin line should give it away - apana.org.au.
@TZUTC: 1000
@MSGID: 3202.fido-ipv6@3:633/410 1defae1b
@REPLY: 2:280/464 5989aa66
@TID: SBBSecho 2.27-Linux r1.261 Dec 26 2015 GCC 4.8.2
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
Then they will fold up the business all together, or sell it to
someone else. It's still an independent "daughter".
Your ISP sounds a lot like mine - now owned by a much larger company,
but maintain their independent operating.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Five years is a long time in a rapidly changing world. I am stll optimistic. I still hope that it will take less than five years before
we reach the tipping point when IPv6 will be the dominant protocol and IPv4 will fade away...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I haven't looked into their DDNS service, but I may have a closer look one of these days. My IPv6 prefix is dynamic, but it has only changed once in the now eight month that I have my present CPE. That change was caused by an unscheduled power outage. If it only happens once or twice
a year, it is no big deal to update manually. OTOH it may happen at a very inconvenient time...
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Biggest issue is their key configuration page are only in German. :(
No problem for me. ;-)
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
But I think apana.org is the one you mentioned... ;)
My origin line should give it away - apana.org.au.
Didn't notice that. ;)
(It's the same page as apana.org)
Markus Reschke wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
That might be the better way anyway. The daughter ISP is more flexible
and can offer services which Ma ISP can't, acting like a special
business unit for customized solutions. Usually Ma carrier assimilates
the small ISP completely, migrates customers to standard platforms and
so on. I've experienced that first hand.
You would have to run the IPv6 version of the script on the device you want to register in DDNS, but it should work fine. I did some brief testing of DDNS on my router. One thing I notice is I can't register a
v4 and v6 address at the same time. I might try running the v6
version on another host and see if both can be registered at the same time.
You would have to run the IPv6 version of the script on the device
you want to register in DDNS, but it should work fine. I did some
brief testing of DDNS on my router. One thing I notice is I can't
register a v4 and v6 address at the same time. I might try running
the v6 version on another host and see if both can be registered at
the same time.
My Netgear WNDR3700 running OpenWRT seems to suffer from that as
well. It's not a big deal; I just need to let the router do IPv4 and
run a client on my Linux BBS box to handle IPv6.
Well, nothing's really changed at the retail level here in the past several years, and I haven't seen any signs of change from other ISPs,
so 5 years seems like will pass in the blink of an eye. Hope I'm
wrong, but I don't like my chances.
You would have to run the IPv6 version of the script on the device you want to register in DDNS, but it should work fine.
I did some brief testing of DDNS on my router. One thing I notice is I can't register a v4 and v6 address at the same time. I might try
running the v6 version on another host and see if both can be
registered at the same time.
Andrew Leary wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
My Netgear WNDR3700 running OpenWRT seems to suffer from that as well. It's not a big deal; I just need to let the router do IPv4 and run a client on my Linux BBS box to handle IPv6.
Markus Reschke wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
Does the DDNS client send the public IP address to the server, or does
the DDNS server determine the address via the connection from the
client? In the latter case you would need one update for IPv4 and
another for IPv6.
For IPv6 I need a bit more than just changing one address. What I need
is to change the prefix of ALL addresses of devices reachable from outside.
For IPv6 I need a bit more than just changing one address. What I
need is to change the prefix of ALL addresses of devices
reachable from outside.
You mean Mobile IPv6? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_IP
Quite simple, bind and a script which figures out the prefix and runs nsupdate to update all your AAAAs. For an extra layer of security wrap that in ssh, i.e. put the script on the server.
"where is that pioneer spirit" ? ;-)
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
How does IPv6 penetration of the WWW look from your POV in your neck of the woods? When I urf the web the majority of sites that I visit is reachable via IPv6. So from my POV IPv6 already is dominant on the WWW. How about you?
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
In what seems to be a previous life, I had such a script running on my win95 machine to update my IPv4 DNS with EuroDNS. I dropped it when I pensioned that win95 machine because my IPv4 address only changed when the MAC address of the CPE changed. i.e. never unless I changed
hardware.
For IPv6 I need a bit more than just changing one address. What I need
is to change the prefix of ALL addresses of devices reachable from outside.
My Netgear WNDR3700 running OpenWRT seems to suffer from that as
well. It's not a big deal; I just need to let the router do IPv4
and run a client on my Linux BBS box to handle IPv6.
Yeah, that seems to be the way to go. The "client" looks like it
would be nothing more than wget or curl. :)
My Netgear WNDR3700 running OpenWRT seems to suffer from that as
well. It's not a big deal; I just need to let the router do IPv4
and run a client on my Linux BBS box to handle IPv6.
Yeah, that seems to be the way to go. The "client" looks like it
would be nothing more than wget or curl. :)
wget and curl is Linux speak. Not much use for running the script on a Windows system.
ver
curlcurl: try 'curl --help' or 'curl --manual' for more information
wgetwget: missing URL
curlcurl: try 'curl --help' or 'curl --manual' for more information
wgetwget: missing URL
Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]...
Try `wget --help' for more options.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
wget and curl is Linux speak. Not much use for running the script on a Windows system.
Tommi Koivula wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
ver
Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
curl
curl: try 'curl --help' or 'curl --manual' for more information
wget
wget: missing URL
Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]...
Try `wget --help' for more options.
binkd'binkd' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
curl
curl: try 'curl --help' or 'curl --manual' for more information
wget
wget: missing URL
Usage: wget [OPTION]... [URL]...
Try `wget --help' for more options.
You have a differebt version og windows that I have:
binkd
'binkd' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
operable program or batch file.
Try `wget --help' for more options.
You have a different version of windows that I have:
I didn't say those are bundled with windows. Neither is GoldED. ;D
wget and curl is Linux speak. Not much use for running the
script on a Windows system.
I'm pretty sure you can get wget for Windows with a little Googling.
:)
Hello Tony, On Saturday August 12 2017 07:48, you wrote to me:
wget and curl is Linux speak. Not much use for running the
script on a Windows system.
I'm pretty sure you can get wget for Windows with a littleProbably... But I am always a bit reluctant with downloading
Googling. :)
executables from the InterNet. Expecially when they come from
vague sources...
Aug 12 18:22 2017, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon:MvdV>> Probably... But I am always a bit reluctant with downloading
https://www.regfish.de/domains/dyndns/software
BTW, all domains registered via them include DDNS for IPv4 and IPv6.
Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
Probably... But I am always a bit reluctant with downloading
executables from the InterNet. Expecially when they come from vague sources...
Tommi Koivula wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-
... Says a guy who run windows as a server in internet. ;) ;)
wget and curl is Linux speak. Not much use for running the
script on a Windows system.
I'm pretty sure you can get wget for Windows with a littleProbably... But I am always a bit reluctant with downloading
Googling.
:)
executables from the InterNet. Expecially when they come from vague sources...
If you don't mind the hazzle (wget and curl are very easy to work
with) there is PowerShell, which IS a Windows component. It has both
wget and curl. At least it had, I heard rumours about them being
removed as of version 7.0, dunno if that's so.
Probably... But I am always a bit reluctant with downloading
executables from the InterNet. Expecially when they come from
vague sources...
So do not download from vague sources.
BTW you are very courageous anyhow by putting a Windows box on the Internet.
So do not download from vague sources.
There are plenty of non vague sources ;)
Or you can get also the source from the sources and compile yourself. (Sadly Windows does not come with any compilers by default, another reason not to use it).
BTW you are very courageous anyhow by putting a Windows box on the Internet.
Instead of using http-based updates, direct updates via nsupdate and
rndc keys are more secure, but not that common for embedded devices
that are usually offering the http variant via their webinterface.
Instead of using http-based updates, direct updates via nsupdateYou can also place the nsupdate script on the nameserver and use ssh
and rndc keys are more secure, but not that common for embedded
devices that are usually offering the http variant via their
webinterface.
which provides the remote IP address via a shell variable. Tie the
script to a ssh pub-key and you'll have a pretty nifty and secure DDNS updater.
BTW you are very courageous anyhow by putting a Windows box on theWhy? As long as you properly firewal it, etc, there should be no
Internet.
problem.
Besides, most attempted intrusions here are using NIX commands,
or looking for NIX directories, which of course do not exist.
I did see at least one attmept to get into my router, which did
not succeed.
Why? As long as you properly firewal it, etc, there should be no
problem.
When you have to "properly firewall" something, you're very likely going some wrong way.
Besides, most attempted intrusions here are using NIX commands,
or looking for NIX directories, which of course do not exist.
I guess you mean attempts of command injection through HTTP requests. If so, your observations show the popularity of GNU/Linux-based systems amongst the internet servers, and nothing else.
AOT: regargless of network level protocols used to access them.
I did see at least one attmept to get into my router, which did
not succeed.
Just don't let it get connections from outside (except SSH for management). Removing unnecessary services would be a good start.
My 2:221/10 is a splitted node. The binkp server runs in VPS and itHow have you done this?
passes the mail bundles to my os/2 system to be processed. ;)
--Bye/2 Torsten
Tommi
My 2:221/10 is a splitted node. The binkp server runs in VPS andHow have you done this?
it passes the mail bundles to my os/2 system to be processed. ;)
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able to
answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Well, I'm sure, something like that he is using to move the binkp pakets.My 2:221/10 is a splitted node. The binkp server runs in VPS and
it passes the mail bundles to my os/2 system to be processed. ;)
How have you done this?Maybe sshfs or nfs used?
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able
to answer on my native ipv6 connection.
With best regards, Alexandr.Bye/2 Torsten
08.08.2017 20:19, Tommi Koivula schrieb an Wilfred van Velzen:
My 2:221/10 is a splitted node. The binkp server runs in VPS and it
passes the mail bundles to my os/2 system to be processed. ;)
How have you done this?
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able to
answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Bye/2 Torsten
My 2:221/10 is a splitted node. The binkp server runs in VPS and
it passes the mail bundles to my os/2 system to be processed. ;)
How have you done this?
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able to
answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Maybe sshfs or nfs used?
How have you done this?
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able
to answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Maybe sshfs or nfs used?Or ftp or google drive. :D See my reply to Torsten.
How have you done this?
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't able
to answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Maybe sshfs or nfs used?
Or ftp or google drive. :D See my reply to Torsten.Excellent! I thus made a dial-up to the VDS =)
But it's more interesting, how Tommi connected a VPS on his OS/2
Machine with IPv6.
My OS/2 (Ecomstation 2.2) has no ipv6 stack. So binkd isn't
able to answer on my native ipv6 connection.
Maybe sshfs or nfs used?
Or ftp or google drive. :D See my reply to Torsten.
Excellent! I thus made a dial-up to the VDS =)Not a big deal when you have AS5300 with E1 stream...
Not a big deal when you have AS5300 with E1 stream...
I have not yet thought how to have E1 at home =)
FS... that's dual stack (why lite?), regardless of whether IPv4
is CGNATed.
Because usually DS is NOT regardless weather you have a public v4 or
not. (DS usually means public v4/public v6; DS-Lite if you only have a public v6 address)
DS-Lite is specified here:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6333
Dual-Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4 Exhaustion
Sysop: | Nelgin |
---|---|
Location: | Plano, TX |
Users: | 615 |
Nodes: | 10 (1 / 9) |
Uptime: | 53:49:14 |
Calls: | 9,850 |
Calls today: | 5 |
Files: | 96,973 |
Messages: | 1,080,733 |
Posted today: | 1 |