Re: IPv6

[Mark Rivers via Core-talk <core-talk at aps.anl.gov>]

> Think that all switches, routers, firewalls refuse to transport IPv4 one day.


I believe that switches operate below the level of the network protocol, they just operate at the level of Ethernet packets. I don't think they can refuse to transport IPv4.  They are currently transporting some traffic that is not even IP at all.


Today all of the traffic between all of my IOCs and devices only goes through switches, no routers or firewalls.  So that should continue to operate fine as long as the OS continues to support IPv4 on the NIC?

I don't believe it is necessary to have a local cable.

Mark

________________________________
From: Torsten Bögershausen <Torsten.Bogershausen at ess.eu>
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2021 2:45 AM
To: Mark Rivers; 'Michael Davidsaver'; Johnson, Andrew N.; Ben Franksen
Cc: EPICS core-talk
Subject: Re: IPv6

My understanding is that the core network must be running IPv6.

That is all IOC-IOC communication, channel access, pv access.
All clients talking to an IOC:
CSS, caget, pvget, archiver, alarm handler, EDM, MEDM and so on.

Think that all routes and switches between your office and the beamline
onöy transport IPv6.

But, back to asyn:
To my understanding, once you have an IOC running this way,
I think this IOC can "speak" RS232, RS485, USB, Modbus, or even TCP v4
to a local device.
Think that all switches, routers, firewalls refuse to transport IPv4 one day.
You can still have a local cable between the IOC and the device.

/Torsten

On 2021-03-16, 20:37, "Core-talk on behalf of Mark Rivers via Core-talk" <core-talk-bounces at aps.anl.gov on behalf of core-talk at aps.anl.gov> wrote:

    How will we handle the fact that tens of thousands of devices use IP4 and will never have their firmware updated?  Will we still be able to talk to them?  Will their use require an exception?

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Core-talk <core-talk-bounces at aps.anl.gov> On Behalf Of Michael Davidsaver via Core-talk
    Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 2:04 PM
    To: Johnson, Andrew N. <anj at anl.gov>; Ben Franksen <benjamin.franksen at helmholtz-berlin.de>
    Cc: core-talk at aps.anl.gov
    Subject: Re: IPv6

    Personally, I see IPv6 as one of several "modernization" requirements which seem likely drop at some point within say 5 years.

    The biggest one being something along the lines of "all network services must employ strong authentication and encryption".  I expect that the continuing drumbeat of headlines about PLC security problems will at some point spill over into the EPICS world in a way which makes arguing for exemptions untenable.

    Our community can either be proactive, or wait to be surprised.


    On 3/16/21 11:33 AM, Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk wrote:
    > On Mar 16, 2021, at 4:32 AM, Ben Franksen <benjamin.franksen at helmholtz-berlin.de> wrote:
    >>
    >> Am 16.03.21 um 09:44 schrieb Zimoch Dirk (PSI) via Core-talk:
    >>> On Fri, 2021-03-12 at 03:34 +0000, Johnson, Andrew N. via Core-talk wrote:
    >>>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/M-21-07.pdf
    >>>>
    >>>> - Andrew
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> TL;DR
    >>> Do we have a problem?
    >>
    >> I may be wrong, but AFAIU only facilities in the US have a problem.
    >> They need to convince their over-bosses that they get an exception.
    >
    > Sorry, but if we don’t consider how we can add support for IPv6 soon EPICS will probably no longer be eligible for use by the kinds of large experimental facilities that have funded its development to date, and it will die. I’m not saying it’s urgent, but we should start to plan for it.
    >
    > That OMB memo was signed by the previous US administration, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t developed by their political appointees, and IMHO hoping that the new administration will rescind it would be a mistake. Existing DOE facilities will almost certainly be getting exemptions of some kind, but EPICS doesn’t have a monopoly in this field and if we don’t support it many future Government-funded projects will have to find an alternative since IPv6-only networking will most likely become a non-negotiable requirement at some point. This isn’t likely to be unique to the US either.
    >
    > IPv6 use has been growing and many cellphone networks now depend on it (that DJB article which Ben found has a last-modified date of August 2003). There’s a page with links to several adoption statistics websites at
    >     https://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/ipv6/statistics/
    >
    > I’m hoping that we’ll be able to get some DOE funding to actually do the porting work. Given the number of DOE facilities that use EPICS it seemed reasonable to suggest that, which I have done to the team that is planning the DOE’s response to that memo.
    >
    > - Andrew
    >