text:
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) O. Troan, Ed. Request for Comments: 7157 Cisco Category: Informational D. Miles ISSN: 2070-1721 Google Fiber S. Matsushima Softbank Telecom T. Okimoto NTT West D. Wing Cisco March 2014 IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address Translation Abstract Network Address and Port Translation (NAPT) works well for conserving global addresses and addressing multihoming requirements because an IPv4 NAPT router implements three functions: source address selection, next-hop resolution, and (optionally) DNS resolution. For IPv6 hosts, one approach could be the use of IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation (NPTv6). However, NAT and NPTv6 should be avoided, if at all possible, to permit transparent end-to-end connectivity. In this document, we analyze the use cases of multihoming. We also describe functional requirements and possible solutions for multihoming without the use of NAT in IPv6 for hosts and small IPv6 networks that would otherwise be unable to meet minimum IPv6-allocation criteria. We conclude that DHCPv6-based solutions are suitable to solve the multihoming issues described in this document, but NPTv6 may be required as an intermediate solution. Status of This Memo This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7157. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 1]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. IPv6 Multihomed Network Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. Classification of Network Scenarios for Multihomed Host . 6 3.2. Multihomed Network Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.3. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.1. End-to-End Transparency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2. Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Problem Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.1. Source Address Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2. Next Hop Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.3. DNS Recursive Name Server Selection . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6. Implementation Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1. Source Address Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.2. Next Hop Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.3. DNS Recursive Name Server Selection . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.4. Other Algorithms Available in RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. Considerations for MHMP Deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1. Non-MHMP Host Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.2. Coexistence Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.3. Policy Collision Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Troan, et al. Informational [Page 2]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 1. Introduction In this document, we analyze the use cases of multihoming, describe functional requirements, and describe the problems with IPv6 multihoming. There are two ways to avoid the problems of IPv6 multihoming: 1. using IPv6-to-IPv6 network prefix translation (NPTv6) [RFC6296], or; 2. refining IPv6 specifications to resolve the problems with IPv6 multihoming. This document concerns itself with the latter and explores the solution space. We hope this will encourage the development of solutions to the problem so that, in the long run, NPTv6 can be avoided. IPv6 provides enough globally unique addresses to permit every conceivable host on the Internet to be uniquely addressed without the requirement for Network Address Port Translation (NAPT) [RFC3022], offering a renaissance in end-to-end transparent connectivity. Unfortunately, this may not be possible in every case, due to the possible necessity of NAT even in IPv6, because of multihoming. Though there are mechanisms to implement multihoming, such as BGP multihoming [RFC4116] at the network level and multihoming based on the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) [RFC4960] in the transport layer, there is no mechanism in IPv6 that serves as a replacement for NAT-based multihoming in IPv4. In IPv4, for a host or a small network, NAT-based multihoming is easily deployable and is an already-deployed technique. Whenever a host or small network (that does not meet minimum IPv6 allocation criteria) is connected to multiple upstream networks, an IPv6 address is assigned by each respective service provider resulting in hosts with multiple global scope IPv6 addresses with different prefixes. As each service provider is allocated a different address space from its Internet Registry, it, in turn, assigns a different address space to the end-user network or host. For example, a remote access user's host or router may use a VPN to simultaneously connect to a remote network and retain a default route to the Internet for other purposes. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 3]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 In IPv4, a common solution to the multihoming problem is to employ NAPT on a border router and use private address space for individual host addressing. The use of NAPT allows hosts to have exactly one IP address visible on the public network, and the combination of NAPT with provider-specific outside addresses (one for each uplink) and destination-based routing insulates a host from the impacts of multiple upstream networks. The border router may also implement a DNS cache or DNS policy to resolve address queries from hosts. It is our goal to avoid the IPv6 equivalent of NAT. So, the goals for IPv6 multihoming defined in [RFC3582] do not match the goals of this document. Also, regardless of what the NPTv6 specification is, we are trying to avoid any form of network address translation technique that may not be visible to either of the end hosts. To reach this goal, several mechanisms are needed for end-user hosts to have multiple address assignments and resolve issues such as which address to use for sourcing traffic to which destination: o If multiple routers exist on a single link, the host must select the appropriate next hop for each connected network. Each router is in turn connected to a different service provider network, which provides independent address assignment. Routing protocols that would normally be employed for router-to-router network advertisement seem inappropriate for use by individual hosts. o Source address selection becomes difficult whenever a host has more than one address of the same address scope. Current address selection criteria may result in hosts using an arbitrary or random address when sourcing upstream traffic. Unfortunately, for the host, the appropriate source address is a function of the upstream network for which the packet is bound. If an upstream service provider uses IP anti-spoofing or ingress filtering, it is conceivable that the packets that have an inappropriate source address for the upstream network would never reach their destination. o In a multihomed environment, different DNS scopes or partitions may exist in each independent upstream network. A DNS query sent to an arbitrary upstream DNS recursive name server may result in incorrect or poisoned responses. In short, while IPv6 facilitates hosts having more than one address in the same address scope, the application of this causes significant issues for a host from routing, source address selection, and DNS resolution perspectives. A possible consequence of assigning a host multiple identically scoped addresses is severely impaired IP connectivity. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 4]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 If a host connects to a network behind an IPv4 NAPT, the host has one private address in the local network. There is no confusion. The NAT becomes the gateway of the host and forwards the packet to an appropriate network when it is multihomed. It also operates a DNS cache server or DNS proxy, which receives all DNS inquires, and gives a correct answer to the host. 2. Terminology NPTv6 IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation as described in [RFC6296]. NAPT Network Address Port Translation as described in [RFC3022]. In other contexts, NAPT is often pronounced "NAT" or written as "NAT". MHMP Multihomed with multi-prefix. A host implementation that supports the mechanisms described in this document; namely, source address selection policy, next hop selection, and DNS selection policy. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 5]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 3. IPv6 Multihomed Network Scenarios In this section, we classify three scenarios of the multihoming environment. 3.1. Classification of Network Scenarios for Multihomed Host Scenario 1: In this scenario, two or more routers are present on a single link shared with the host(s). Each router is, in turn, connected to a different service provider network, which provides independent address assignment and DNS recursive name servers. A host in this environment would be offered multiple prefixes and DNS recursive name servers advertised from the two different routers. +------+ ___________ | | / \ +---| rtr1 |=====/ network \ | | | \ 1 / +------+ | +------+ \___________/ | | | | hosts|-----+ | | | +------+ | +------+ ___________ | | | / \ +---| rtr2 |=====/ network \ | | \ 2 / +------+ \___________/ Figure 1: Single Uplink, Multiple Next Hop, Multiple Prefix (Scenario 1) Figure 1 illustrates the host connecting to rtr1 and rtr2 via a shared link. Networks 1 and 2 are reachable via rtr1 and rtr2, respectively. When the host sends packets to network 1, the next hop to network 1 is rtr1. Similarly, rtr2 is the next hop to network 2. Example: multiple broadband service providers (Internet, VoIP, IPTV, etc.) Troan, et al. Informational [Page 6]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 Scenario 2: In this scenario, a single gateway router connects the host to two or more upstream service provider networks. This gateway router would receive prefix delegations and a different set of DNS recursive name servers from each independent service provider network. The gateway, in turn, advertises the provider prefixes to the host, and for DNS, may either act as a lightweight DNS cache server or advertise the complete set of service provider DNS recursive name servers to the hosts. +------+ ___________ +-----+ | | / \ | |=======| rtr1 |=====/ network \ | |port1 | | \ 1 / +------+ | | +------+ \___________/ | | | | | hosts|-----| GW | | | | rtr | +------+ | | +------+ ___________ | |port2 | | / \ | |-------| rtr2 |=====/ network \ +-----+ | | \ 2 / +------+ \___________/ Figure 2: Single Uplink, Single Next Hop, Multiple Prefix (Scenario 2) Figure 2 illustrates the host connected to GW rtr. GW rtr connects to networks 1 and 2 via port1 and 2, respectively. As the figure shows a logical topology of the scenario, port1 could be a pseudo- interface for tunneling, which connects to network 1 through network 2 and vice versa. When the host sends packets to either network 1 or 2, the next hop is GW rtr. When the packets are sent to network 1 (network 2), GW rtr forwards the packets to port1 (port2). Example: Internet + VPN / Application Service Provider (ASP) Troan, et al. Informational [Page 7]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 Scenario 3: In this scenario, a host has more than one active interface that connects to different routers and service provider networks. Each router provides the host with a different address prefix and set of DNS recursive name servers, resulting in a host with a unique address per link/interface. +------+ +------+ ___________ | | | | / \ | |-----| rtr1 |=====/ network \ | | | | \ 1 / | | +------+ \___________/ | | | host | | | | | +------+ ___________ | | | | / \ | |=====| rtr2 |=====/ network \ | | | | \ 2 / +------+ +------+ \___________/ Figure 3: Multiple Uplink, Multiple Next Hop, Multiple Prefix (Scenario 3) Figure 3 illustrates the host connecting to rtr1 and rtr2 via a direct connection or a virtual link. When the host sends packets to network 1, the next hop to network 1 is rtr1. Similarly, rtr2 is the next hop to network 2. Example: Mobile Wifi + 3G, ISP A + ISP B 3.2. Multihomed Network Environment In an IPv6 multihomed network, a host is assigned two or more IPv6 addresses and DNS recursive name servers from independent service provider networks. When this multihomed host attempts to connect with other hosts, it may incorrectly resolve the next-hop router, use an inappropriate source address, or use a DNS response from an incorrect service provider that may result in impaired IP connectivity. In many cases, multihomed networks in IPv4 have been implemented through the use of a gateway router with NAPT function (scenario 2 with NAPT). An analysis of the current IPv4 NAPT and DNS functions within the gateway router should provide a baseline set of Troan, et al. Informational [Page 8]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 requirements for IPv6 multihomed environments. A destination prefix/ route is often used on the gateway router to separate traffic between the networks. +------+ ___________ | | / \ +---| rtr1 |=====/ network \ | | | \ 1 / +------+ +-----+ | +------+ \___________/ | IPv4 | | | | | hosts|-----| GW |---+ | | | rtr | | +------+ +-----+ | +------+ ___________ (NAPT&DNS) | | | / \ (private +---| rtr2 |=====/ network \ address | | \ 2 / space) +------+ \___________/ Figure 4: IPv4 Multihomed Environment with Gateway Router Performing NAPT 3.3. Problem Statement A multihomed IPv6 host has one or more assigned IPv6 addresses and DNS recursive name servers from each upstream service provider, resulting in the host having multiple valid IPv6 addresses and DNS recursive name servers. The host must be able to resolve the appropriate next hop, the correct source address, and the correct DNS recursive name server to use based on the destination prefix. To prevent IP spoofing, operators will often implement ingress filtering to discard traffic with an inappropriate source address, making it essential for the host to correctly resolve these three items before sourcing the first packet. IPv6 has mechanisms for the provision of multiple routers on a single link and multiple address assignments to a single host. However, when these mechanisms are applied to the three scenarios described in Section 3.1, a number of connectivity issues are identified: Scenario 1: The host has been assigned an address from each router and recognizes both rtr1 and rtr2 as valid default routers (in the default routers list). Troan, et al. Informational [Page 9]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 o The source address selection policy on the host does not deterministically resolve a source address. Ingress filtering or filter policies will discard traffic with source addresses that the operator did not assign. o The host will select one of the two routers as the active default router. No traffic is sent to the other router. Scenario 2: The host has been assigned two different addresses from the single gateway router. The gateway router is the only default router on the link. o The source address selection policy on the host does not deterministically resolve a source address. Ingress filtering or filter policies will discard traffic with source addresses that the operator did not assign. o The gateway router does not have an autonomous mechanism for determining which traffic should be sent to which network. If the gateway router is implementing host functions (i.e., processing Router Advertisement (RA)), then two valid default routers may be recognized. Scenario 3: A host has two separate interfaces, and each interface has a different address assigned. Each link has its own router. o The host does not have enough information to determine which traffic should be sent to which upstream routers. The host will select one of the two routers as the active default router, and no traffic is sent to the other router. The default address selection rules select the address assigned to the outgoing interface as the source address. So, if a host has an appropriate routing table, an appropriate source address will be selected. All scenarios: o In network deployments utilizing local namespaces, the host may choose to communicate with a "wrong" DNS recursive server unable to serve a local namespace. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 10]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 4. Requirements This section describes requirements that any solution multi-address and multi-uplink architectures need to meet. 4.1. End-to-End Transparency One of the major design goals for IPv6 is to restore the end-to-end transparency of the Internet. If NAT is applied to IP communication between hosts, NAT traversal mechanisms are required to establish bidirectional IP communication. In an environment with end-to-end transparency, a NAT traversal mechanism does not need to be implemented in an application (e.g., ICE [RFC5245]). Therefore, the IPv6 multihoming solution should strive to avoid NPTv6 to achieve end-to-end transparency. 4.2. Scalability The solution will have to be able to manage a large number of sites/ nodes. In services for residential users, provider edge devices have to manage thousands of sites. In such environments, sending packets periodically to each site may affect edge system performance. 5. Problem Analysis The problems described in Section 3 can be classified into these three types: o Wrong source address selection o Wrong next hop selection o Wrong DNS server selection This section reviews the problem statements presented above and the proposed functional requirements to resolve the issues. 5.1. Source Address Selection A multihomed IPv6 host will typically have different addresses assigned from each service provider on either the same link (scenarios 1 and 2) or different links (scenario 3). When the host wishes to send a packet to any given destination, the current source address selection rules [RFC6724] may not deterministically select the correct source address. [RFC7078] describes the use of the policy table (as discussed in [RFC6724]) to resolve this problem, using a DHCPv6 mechanism for host policy table management. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 11]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 Again, by employing DHCPv6, the server could restrict address assignment (of additional prefixes) only to hosts that support policy table management. Scenario 1: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 2: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 3: If Host supports the next hop selection solution, there is no need to support the address selection functionality on the host. It is noted that the network's DHCP server and DHCP-forwarding routers must also support the Address Selection option [RFC7078]. 5.2. Next Hop Selection A multihomed IPv6 host or gateway may have multiple uplinks to different service providers. Here, each router would use Router Advertisements [RFC4861] to distribute default route/next-hop information to the host or gateway router. In this case, the host or gateway router may select any valid default router from the default routers list, resulting in traffic being sent to the wrong router and discarded by the upstream service provider. Using the above scenarios as an example, whenever the host wishes to reach a destination in network 2 and there is no connectivity between networks 1 and 2 (as is the case for a walled-garden or closed service), the host or gateway router does not know whether to forward traffic to rtr1 or rtr2 to reach a destination in network 2. The host or gateway router may choose rtr1 as the default router, but traffic will fail to reach the destination server. The host or gateway router requires route information for each upstream service provider, but the use of a routing protocol between the gateway and the two routers causes both configuration and scaling issues. In IPv4, gateway routers are often pre-configured with static routes or use the Classless Static Route Options [RFC3442] for DHCPv4. An extension to Router Advertisements through Default Router Preference and More-Specific Routes [RFC4191] provides for link-specific preferences but does not address per-host configuration in a multi- access topology because of its reliance on Router Advertisements. Scenario 1: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 2: GW rtr needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 3: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 12]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 5.3. DNS Recursive Name Server Selection A multihomed IPv6 host or gateway router may be provided multiple DNS recursive name servers through DHCPv6 [RFC3646] or RA [RFC6106]. When the host or gateway router sends a DNS query, it would normally choose one of the available DNS recursive name servers for the query. In the IPv6 gateway router scenario, the Broadband Forum (BBF) [TR-124] requires that the query be sent to all DNS recursive name servers and that the gateway wait for the first reply. In IPv6, given our use of specific destination-based policy for both routing and source address selection, it is desirable to extend a policy- based concept to DNS recursive name server selection. Doing so can minimize DNS recursive name server load and avoid issues where DNS recursive name servers in different networks have connectivity issues, or the DNS recursive name servers are not publicly accessible. In the worst case, a DNS query for a name from a local namespace may not be resolved correctly if sent towards a DNS server not aware of said local namespace, resulting in a lack of connectivity. It is not an issue of the Domain Name System model itself, but an IPv6 multihomed host or gateway router should have the ability to select appropriate DNS recursive name servers for each service based on the domain space for the destination, and each service should provide rules specific to that network. [RFC6731] proposes a solution for distributing DNS server selection policy using a DHCPv6 option. Scenario 1: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 2: GW rtr needs to support the solution for this problem. Scenario 3: Host needs to support the solution for this problem. It is noted that the network's DHCP server and DHCP-forwarding routers must also support the Address Selection option [RFC6731]. 6. Implementation Approach As mentioned in Section 5, in the multi-prefix environment, we have three problems: source address selection, next hop selection, and DNS recursive name server selection. In this section, possible solutions for each problem are introduced and evaluated against the requirements in Section 4. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 13]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 6.1. Source Address Selection The problems of address selection in multi-prefix environments are summarized in [RFC5220]. When solutions are examined against the requirements in Section 4, the proactive approaches, such as the policy table distribution mechanism and the routing hints mechanism, are more appropriate in that they can propagate the network administrator's policy directly. The policy distribution mechanism has an advantage with regard to the host's protocol stack impact and the static nature of the assumed target network environment. 6.2. Next Hop Selection As for the source address selection problem, both a policy-based approach and a non-policy-based approach are possible with regard to the next hop selection problem. Because of the same requirements, the policy propagation-based solution mechanism, whatever the policy, should be more appropriate. Routing information is a typical example of policy related to next hop selection. If we assume source-address-based routing at hosts or intermediate routers, pairs of source prefixes and next hops can be another example of next hop selection policy. The routing-information-based approach has a clear advantage in implementation and is already commonly used. The existing proposed or standardized routing information distribution mechanisms are routing protocols (such as Routing Information Protocol Next Generation (RIPng) and OSPFv3), the RA extension option defined in [RFC4191], and the CPE WAN Management Protocol (CWMP) [TR069] standardized at BBF. The RA-based mechanism doesn't handle distribution of per-host routing information easily. Dynamic routing protocols are not typically used between residential users and ISPs, because of their scalability and security implications. The DHCPv6 mechanism does not have these problems and has the advantage of relay functionality. It is commonly used and is thus easy to deploy. [TR069], mentioned above, defines a possible solution mechanism for routing information distribution to customer premises equipment (CPE). It assumes, however, that IP reachability to the Auto Configuration Server (ACS) has been established. Therefore, if the CPE requires routing information to reach the ACS, CWMP [TR069] cannot be used to distribute this information. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 14]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 6.3. DNS Recursive Name Server Selection Note: Split-horizon DNS is discussed in this section. Split- horizon DNS is known to cause problems with applications to allow information leakage. The discussion of split-horizon DNS is not condoning its use, but rather acknowledging that split-horizon DNS is used and that its use is another justification for network address translation. The goal of this document is to encourage building solutions that do not need network address translation. Two solutions appear possible: improve the function of split- horizon DNS (which is discussed below) or meet network administrators' requirements without split-horizon DNS (which is out of scope of this document). As in the above two problems, a policy-based approach and a non- policy-based approach are possible. In a non-policy-based approach, a host or a home gateway router is assumed to send DNS queries to several DNS recursive name servers at once or to select one of the available servers. In the non-policy-based approach, by making a query to a DNS recursive name server in a different service provider to that which hosts the service, a user could be directed to an unexpected IP address or receive an invalid response, and thus it could not connect to the service provider's private and legitimate service. For example, some DNS recursive name servers reply with different answers depending on the source address of the DNS query, which is sometimes called "split-horizon". When the host mistakenly makes a query to a different provider's DNS recursive name server to resolve a Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) of another provider's private service, and the DNS recursive name server adopts the split-horizon configuration, the queried server returns an IP address of the non- private side of the service. Another problem with this approach is that it causes unnecessary DNS traffic to the DNS recursive name servers that are visible to the users. The alternative to a policy-based approach is documented in [RFC6731], where several pairs of DNS recursive name server addresses and DNS domain suffixes are defined as part of a policy and conveyed to hosts in a new DHCP option. In an environment where there is a home gateway router, that router can act as a DNS recursive name server, interpret this option, and distribute DNS queries to the appropriate DNS servers according to the policy. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 15]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 6.4. Other Algorithms Available in RFCs The authors of this document are aware of a variety of other algorithms and architectures, such as Shim6 [RFC5533] and HIP [RFC5206], that may be useful in this environment. At the time of this writing, there is not enough operational experience on which to base a recommendation. Should such operational experience become available, this document may be updated in the future. 7. Considerations for MHMP Deployment This section describes considerations to mitigate possible problems in a network that implements MHMP (described in Section 6). 7.1. Non-MHMP Host Consideration In a typical IPv4 multihomed network deployment, IPv4 NAPT is practically used and it can eventually avoid assigning multiple addresses to the hosts and solve the next hop selection problem. In a similar fashion, NPTv6 can be used as a last resort for IPv6 multihomed network deployments where one needs to assign a single IPv6 address to a non-MHMP host. __________ / \ +---/ Internet \ gateway router | \ / +------+ +---------------------+ | \__________/ | | | | | WAN1 +--+ | host |-----|LAN| Router |--------| | | | | |NAT|WAN2+--+ +------+ +---------------------+ | __________ | / \ +---/ ASP \ \ / \__________/ Figure 5: Legacy Host The gateway router also has to support the two features, next hop selection and DNS server selection, shown in Section 6. The implementation and issues of NPTv6 are out of the scope of this document, but are discussed in Section 5 of [RFC6296]. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 16]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 7.2. Coexistence Considerations To allow the coexistence of non-MHMP hosts and MHMP hosts (i.e., hosts supporting multi-prefix with the enhancements for the source address selection), GW rtr may need to treat those hosts separately. An idea for how to achieve this would be for GW rtr to identify the hosts, and then assign a single prefix to non-MHMP hosts and assign multiple prefixes to MHMP hosts. In this case, GW rtr can perform IPv6 NAT only for the traffic from non-MHMP hosts if its source address is not appropriate. Another idea is that GW rtr could assign multiple prefixes to both hosts and perform IPv6 NAT for traffic from non-MHMP hosts if its source address is not appropriate. In scenarios 1 and 3, the non-MHMP hosts can be placed behind the NAT box. In this case, the non-MHMP host can access the service through the NAT box. The implementation of identifying non-MHMP hosts and NAT policy is outside the scope of this document. 7.3. Policy Collision Consideration When multiple policy distributors exist, a policy receiver may not follow each of the received policies. In particular, when a policy conflicts with another policy, a policy receiver cannot implement both of the policies. To solve or mitigate this issue, a prioritization rule is required to align the policies with the preferences of a trusted interface. Another solution is to preclude the functionality of the acceptance of multiple policies at the receiver side. In this case, a policy distributor should cooperate with other policy distributors, and a single representative provider should distribute a merged policy. This document does not presume specific recommendations for resolving policy collision. It is expected that the implementation will decide how to resolve the conflicts. If they are not resolved consistently by different implementations, that could affect interoperability and security trust boundaries. Future work is expected to address the need for consistent policy resolution to avoid interoperability and security trust boundary issues. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 17]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 8. Security Considerations In today's multihomed IPv4 networks, it is difficult to resolve or coordinate conflicts between the two upstream networks. This problem persists with IPv6, no matter if the hosts use IPv6 provider- dependent or provider-independent addresses. This document requires that MHMP solutions have functions that provide policy controls. New security threats can be introduced depending on the kind and form of the policy. The threats can be categorized in two parts: the policy receiver side and the policy distributor side. A policy receiver may receive an evil policy from a policy distributor. A policy distributor should expect that some hosts in its network will not follow the distributed policy. At the time of this writing, there are no known methods to resolve conflicts between the host's own policy (policy receiver) and the policies of upstream providers (policy provider). As this document is analyzing the problem space, rather than proposing a solution, we note the following problems: Threats related to the policy distributor side: The service provider should expect the existence of hosts that will not obey the received policy. A possible solution is to ingress-filter those packets that do not match the distributed policy and drop them. For route selection, packet forwarding or redirection can be another possible solution. For source address selection, IPv6 NAT can be another possible solution. In a multihomed multiple-provider network, nodes in the network may be administered by different organizations. Administrators might need to control policies (and a node's behavior) independently of other administrators. Access control policies need to be in place to restrict the administrator's access to only the nodes it is authorized to control. Threats related to the policy receiver side: For the policy receiver side, who should be trusted to accept policies is a fundamental issue. How is the trust established? How can the network element be assured that it can establish that trust before the network is fully configured? If a policy receiver trusts an untrusted network, it will cause the distributing of the unwanted and unauthorized policy that is described below. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 18]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 A policy receiver is exposed to the threats of unauthorized policy, which can lead to session hijack, falsification, DoS, wiretapping, and phishing. Unauthorized policy here means a policy distributed from an entity that does not have rights to do so. Usually, only a site administrator and a network service provider have rights to distribute these policies in addition to IP address assignment and DNS server address notification. Regarding source address selection, unauthorized policy can expose an IP address that will not usually be exposed to an external server, which can be a privacy problem. To solve or mitigate the problem of unauthorized policy, one approach is to limit the use of these policy distribution mechanisms, as described in the Section 4.4 of [RFC6731]. For example, a policy should be preferred or accepted if delivered over a secure, trusted channel such as a cellular data connection. The proposed solutions are based on DHCP, so the limitation of local site communication, which is often used in WiFi access services, should be another solution or mitigation for this problem. For the DNS server selection issue, DNS Security (DNSSEC) can be another solution. For source address selection, the ingress filter at the network service provider router can be a solution. Another threat is the leakage of the policy and privacy issues resulting from that. Especially when clients receive different policies from the network service provider, that difference provides hints about the host itself and can be useful to uniquely identify the host. Encryption of the communication channel and separation of the communication channel per host can be solutions for this problem. The security threats related to IPv6 multihoming are described in [RFC4218]. 9. Contributors The following people contributed to this document: Akiko Hattori, Arifumi Matsumoto, Frank Brockners, Fred Baker, Tomohiro Fujisaki, Jun-ya Kato, Shigeru Akiyama, Seiichi Morikawa, Mark Townsley, Wojciech Dec, Yasuo Kashimura, and Yuji Yamazaki. This document has greatly benefited from inputs by Randy Bush, Brian Carpenter, and Teemu Savolainen. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 19]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 10. References 10.1. Normative References [RFC4191] Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005. [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, September 2007. [RFC6296] Wasserman, M. and F. Baker, "IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation", RFC 6296, June 2011. [RFC6724] Thaler, D., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown, "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 6724, September 2012. [RFC6731] Savolainen, T., Kato, J., and T. Lemon, "Improved Recursive DNS Server Selection for Multi-Interfaced Nodes", RFC 6731, December 2012. [RFC7078] Matsumoto, A., Fujisaki, T., and T. Chown, "Distributing Address Selection Policy Using DHCPv6", RFC 7078, January 2014. 10.2. Informative References [RFC3022] Srisuresh, P. and K. Egevang, "Traditional IP Network Address Translator (Traditional NAT)", RFC 3022, January 2001. [RFC3442] Lemon, T., Cheshire, S., and B. Volz, "The Classless Static Route Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 4", RFC 3442, December 2002. [RFC3582] Abley, J., Black, B., and V. Gill, "Goals for IPv6 Site- Multihoming Architectures", RFC 3582, August 2003. [RFC3646] Droms, R., "DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646, December 2003. [RFC4116] Abley, J., Lindqvist, K., Davies, E., Black, B., and V. Gill, "IPv4 Multihoming Practices and Limitations", RFC 4116, July 2005. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 20]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 [RFC4218] Nordmark, E. and T. Li, "Threats Relating to IPv6 Multihoming Solutions", RFC 4218, October 2005. [RFC4960] Stewart, R., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 4960, September 2007. [RFC5206] Nikander, P., Henderson, T., Vogt, C., and J. Arkko, "End- Host Mobility and Multihoming with the Host Identity Protocol", RFC 5206, April 2008. [RFC5220] Matsumoto, A., Fujisaki, T., Hiromi, R., and K. Kanayama, "Problem Statement for Default Address Selection in Multi- Prefix Environments: Operational Issues of RFC 3484 Default Rules", RFC 5220, July 2008. [RFC5245] Rosenberg, J., "Interactive Connectivity Establishment (ICE): A Protocol for Network Address Translator (NAT) Traversal for Offer/Answer Protocols", RFC 5245, April 2010. [RFC5533] Nordmark, E. and M. Bagnulo, "Shim6: Level 3 Multihoming Shim Protocol for IPv6", RFC 5533, June 2009. [RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli, "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration", RFC 6106, November 2010. [TR-124] The Broadband Forum, "TR-124, Functional Requirements for Broadband Residential Gateway Devices", Issue: 2, May 2010, <http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/ TR-124_Issue-2.pdf>. [TR069] The Broadband Forum, "TR-069, CPE WAN Management Protocol v1.1", Version: Issue 1 Amendment 2, December 2007, <http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/ TR-069_Amendment-2.pdf>. Troan, et al. Informational [Page 21]
RFC 7157 IPv6 Multihoming without NAT March 2014 Authors' Addresses Ole Troan (editor) Cisco Oslo Norway EMail: email@example.com David Miles Google Fiber Mountain View, CA USA EMail: email@example.com Satoru Matsushima Softbank Telecom Tokyo Japan EMail: firstname.lastname@example.com Tadahisa Okimoto NTT West Osaka Japan EMail: email@example.com Dan Wing Cisco 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose USA EMail: firstname.lastname@example.com Troan, et al. Informational [Page 22]


text:
The University of Kwazulu-Natal, UKZN Authority as initiated a reliable e-Learning platform for online learning. It is designed to make learning easy at the comfort of your home, or anywhere you may wish to be.
The University of Kwazulu-Natal e-Learning Portal gives students access to online classes, access to e-books, online free courses, virtual classes, and other virtual services and Nursing programmes.
How to Access UKZN E-Learning Portal Login
To have access to the University of Kwazulu-Natal E-Learning Portal, Click on the link provided below.
- Go to the E-Learning Portal Page – https://ukzn.ac.za/student-portal/
- Provide your username and password
- Click on "Submit"
- Then, Follow the next steps till completion
NOTE: You must enter the correct login details to have access to the portal.
Forgotten Your Password?
Read and follow the steps provided below carefully.
- Click the forgot password/username link below the login form,
- then enter your username or your email address in the required field.
- If your account is found in the database of the school, then an email will be sent to your email address with instrUKZNions on how to regain access.
- You can also contact the appropriate department in your school to help you gain back access.
If you have any difficulties regarding this post, Kindly drop us a comment on our comment box below. We will get back to you as soon as possible.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The Echo Collection is for those who want comfort without compromising their look. This fully molded clog is anything but conformist, with bold sculpting and sport inspiration that keeps streetwear at its core. With Croslite™ construction and a LiteRide™ drop-in footbed, you can stay comfortable while hitting the street in the Echo collection.
Crocs Echo Clog Details:
- Incredibly light and easy to wear
- Fully molded Croslite™ upper and foundation
- Water-friendly and buoyant; weighs only ounces
- Ventilation ports add breathability and help shed water
- Easy to clean and quick to dry
- Pivotable turbo heel straps with a heel pad for comfort
- Customizable with Jibbitz™ charms
- Dual density support with Croslite™ sole and LiteRide™ Footbed
Additional information
Size | 1UK, 2UK, 3UK, 4UK, 5UK, 6UK, 7UK, 8UK, 9UK, 10UK, 11UK, 12UK, 13UK, 14UK |


text:
If this is your domain name, please visit this page to see how to register it as DNS zone into your account.
Note: If you already have registered the DNS zone for your domain name, please wait for DNS propagation. Your web site will be displayed soon. It may take few minutes.
* Do you know what the PTR record is?
Suggested article from our blog: What is a PTR record?
The PTR record in the DNS (Domain Name System) is used for Reverse DNS lookup. A good practice is to use Reverse DNS setup for mail servers. Why? Because if there isn't a PTR record, all the outgoing e-mails will get rejected and go straight to the spam.
You need to use PTR records in the Reverse DNS zones. These types of records resolve the IP addresses to domains/hostnames. In other words, by creating a PTR record, you build trust!
Remember, for every A record, there should be a PTR record. Missing PTR or mismatching A Record means problems. If you want to learn more about PTR records, check here!


text:
Dress Code [.cava]
As humanity enters a new graphic skin, how will we remember our physical selves...or are we becoming computational mochas? Where do our avatars hang out when not in use? Our print works from the recent exhibitions Café Avatar explore these meandering questions through playful interplay of figurative and abstract forms, printed on large-format punched synthetic felt. These soft floating modular works (concepted as diptychs, the individual pieces are almost infinitely pairable ) shape shift across an RGB blue void and await your call.
By: Nick Butcher and Nadine Nakanishi
Date: 2017
Medium: Screen print on punched synthetic felt, modular acrylic peg system
Size: Modular; 24 x 36 inches each
Exhibition History: Universtiy of Tennessee at Chattanooga, grayDUCK Gallery


text: I apologize for the delay in getting this out. - Steve Editorial Board Teleconference Summary - September 27, 2001 ----------------------------------------------------------- Participants ------------ Participants in the teleconference included: Stuart Staniford (Silicon Defense) David Mann (BindView) Ken Williams (esecurityonline.com) Pascal Meunier (Purdue CERIAS) Mike Prosser (Symantec) Andre Frech (ISS) Andy Balinsky (Cisco) Dana Foat (NSA) John Flowers (nCircle) Peter Mell (NIST) Scott Lawler (Veridian) Larry Oliver (IBM) Adam Shostack (Zero Knowledge) MITRE participants included: Margie Zuk Bob Martin Steve Christey Dave Baker Barbara Pease Jeff Taylor Gerard Eldering Content Update -------------- Currently, there are 1604 entries and 1796 candidates. 563 legacy candidates (i.e., candidates for issues discovered before 2000) were proposed to the Board earlier in September. There are approximately 5000 vulnerability submissions remaining, many of which describe insecure configurations. Configuration problems are difficult to identify with CVE because configuration is system-dependent, and such problems are not as well-studied as software implementation errors. Teleconference participants were not aware of any detailed research in the area of misconfiguration. Some members of MITRE's content team are currently trying to address Windows-based configuration problems. Because of MITRE's emphasis on creating legacy candidates over the summer, there is a 2-month backlog of candidates that need to be created for more recent issues. MITRE plans to create these candidates by mid-October. 94 candidates are ready to be accepted as official entries, but they are being delayed by Board members who are still reviewing them. Reminder email messages will be sent to those members. Several hundred candidates do not have enough votes to be accepted as entries. Many of these are from the recent group of 563 legacy candidates. MITRE has set a goal of reaching 2002 total CVE entries by January 1, 2002. This would require obtaining enough votes to accept 400 more candidates. This can be accomplished via focused votes on the legacy candidates, many of which have high confidence and good documentation. Also, CVE's data sources (see http://cve.mitre.org/cve/datasources.html) could be provided with tailored voting ballots for candidates that are known to be in the source's database. Also, it is likely that several hundred more new candidates will be proposed, reviewed, and accepted in the next few months. Finally, some CVE content decisions (CDs) are expected to be finalized in the coming months. When this happens, candidates that are affected by those CDs can be accepted as official CVE entries. In addition, those CDs will be sent to the Editorial Board mailing, and published on the CVE web site. CVE candidates and entries will be linked with their associated CDs in a format that has not been determined yet, possibly in the form of a report. There is some interest in this information, as CDs provide guidelines for CVE content. Finally, MITRE will create a small number of high-level candidates related to worms and viruses. As this type of malicious code becomes more prevalent, there is an increased interest in obtaining CVE names for such code. This is reflected in the number of keyword searches for virus names on the CVE web site. Also, people frequently ask whether CVE covers viruses. While MITRE does not plan to solve the virus naming problem - as it's best left to the anti-virus community - it seems appropriate to capture the opinions of Editorial Board members, via their comments on existing candidates. These candidates could list the most well-known viruses, which would be found during keyword searches. CVE users could then view the commentary from Editorial Board members. MITRE's Technology Transfer Program ----------------------------------- Gerard Eldering, the director of MITRE's Technology Transfer Program, spoke to Board members about the program. It is intended to create a mechanism for MITRE to provide certain knowledge and intellectual property for the benefit of the public as well as MITRE's sponsors. A web page is available at http://www.mitre.org/tech_transfer/ Some of MITRE's tech transfer activities have been in the area of information security, including: - An open source release of the Spitfire tool, which integrates information from various vendor IDS products into a single interface (see http://www.mitre.org/news/articles_01/spitfire_openchan09_04_01.shtml) - Licensing use of the ANSSR risk analysis system to Harris Corporation (see http://www.mitre.org/news/articles_01/tech-proto-may01.shtml) - Release of the Egressor tool, which can be used to test egress filtering This portion of the teleconference was intended to raise awareness among Board members, since MITRE expects to be performing similar tech transfer activities in the future, Board members who have questions or concerns regarding MITRE's tech transfer activities may contact Steve Christey, Margie Zuk (email@example.com), and/or Gerard Eldering (firstname.lastname@example.com). Other Editorial Board Business ------------------------------ Now that the roles and responsibilities have been finalized, and the new member recruitment process has been identified, MITRE will begin to add new members to the Board. A private mailing list has been created to discuss prospective members; notification will be sent to current members soon. Some members will also be leaving the Board in the coming months. Those who have made contributions to the CVE Initiative, but who are not Emeritus members, will be identified as "former contributing members." MITRE plans to update the Editorial Board page on the CVE web site to identify the role of each member. MITRE is also considering publicizing each member's tasks as well. CVE Compatibility ----------------- The new requirements document is almost complete. It is composed of a high-level requirements document and several "implementation requirements" documents for specific types of CVE-compatible capabilities such as services, IDS/scanners, and web sites. This provides flexibility in defining more narrow requirements for specific capabilities, without requiring major changes to the base requirements document. As discussed in previous meetings, a major component of the CVE compatibility evaluation process will require the vendor to answer a questionnaire, which will provide specific details for how the vendor has satisfied the requirements. Now that the requirements are near completion, the questionnaire is being developed. Rationales for the requirements are also being added. Once the documentation is complete, MITRE will test the evaluation process on some of its own internal projects, such as the CVE web site. MITRE plans to complete this phase in 1 month. MITRE will then extend the tests to several "early adopters" - external organizations whose products already satisfy the requirements. After that phase, the process will be fully publicized, and the formal evaluation of compatible products can begin. Currently, there are 62 products or services whose vendors have made declarations of their intentions to make their products CVE-compatible. 12 other organizations are working on declarations. Bob Martin (email@example.com) is the lead of the CVE compatibility task. During the teleconference, Board members discussed the amount of pressure and customer requests that vendors are receiving for making their products CVE-compatible. The responses were mixed. Some members did not see an increasing number of customers asking for CVE compatibility. Others had large customers who requested the capability, in order to help them link with other CVE-compatible tools that they use. In other cases, customers would provide the vendor with a list of CVE names, and ask the vendor which of those CVE items were addressed by the vendor's product. Industry analyses that recommend CVE compatibility as a desired feature (such as the Network Computing comparisons of IDSes and scanners) only have a temporary effect. There was some discussion regarding an upcoming NIST document which will recommend that government agencies prefer CVE-compatible products over those that are not compatible. Several Board members said that the upcoming guidelines were the strongest impetus for them to adopt CVE-compatibility. The creation of these guidelines was prompted by the CVE Advisory Council. Once published, there will be a public comment period. Board members were asked what percentage of their database could be mapped to CVE names. This effectively measures how close CVE is to providing complete coverage across products. Members provided a wide range of answers, between 40% and nearly 100% for each database. Some of the coverage can be limited when the database includes items that do not satisfy the CVE definition of vulnerability or exposure. This can include various attack-related events recorded by intrusion detection systems, which will be covered by CIEL. Common Intrusion Event List (CIEL) ---------------------------------- Now that the roles and responsibilities have been finalized, the CIEL working group will be formed shortly. Interested Board members will be added to a separate mailing list. Some issues with respect to membership have arisen out of the CIEL efforts. Some companies with 2 Board members may want additional people to join in order to support CIEL, but generally there is a 2-person limit per organization on the Editorial Board. This could be addressed by allowing members on the CIEL working group who are not on the Editorial Board. Alternately, the Editorial Board membership limits could be extended to 3 people, if one of them is workin on CIEL. One teleconference participant asked whether the CIEL working group will be a decision-making body. This question will be addressed as the working group grows. MITRE presented a short update of its progress on CIEL. Over the summer, Bill Hill and Brian Caswell created a new version of CIEL. In September, Steve Christey met with Bill and Brian to evaluate that version, and to map some signatures to CIEL entries. Some difficulties were encountered while doing the mappings. The most critical issue was that some CIEL entries overlapped. As a result, some IDS signatures could be mapped to 2 CIEL entries. In addition, the context fields - which provide greater levels of detail underneath a CIEL entry - were insufficient to fully represent the related signature. At the very least, this indicates an issue with the categories as currently chosen. However, the MITRE team believes that this sort of problem is likely to arise regardless of the categorization scheme that is adopted within CIEL. The MITRE team is considering a significant change CIEL by adopting a scheme in which CIEL names are formed out of combinations of features ("field=value" pairs), as opposed to a taxonomical scheme which forms the basis of the names. These features would provide greater flexibility in representing attacks. Unfortunately, due to the events of September 11, the MITRE team has not been able to conduct follow-up work to further refine this new approach. Other Topics ------------ In recent months, MITRE has been working with a security company from China who wishes to translate CVE to the Chinese language. The company plans to offer a fullly translated mirror of the CVE web site, using several different Chinese character sets. While MITRE does not plan to actively search for other CVE translations at this time, criteria have been devised to help determine qualified sites. Finally, a teleconference participant asked about prioritization of the content tasks, as the recent creation of legacy candidates has introduced several new tasks. It is recommended that Board members prioritize their activities as follows: - providing MITRE with information on remaining legacy submissions (these requests for consultation were sent a few days before the teleconference) - tailored voting (e.g., MITRE will send voting "ballots" to its data sources for issues that are known to be in the source's database) - voting on new or legacy candidates, based on the Board member's own priorities


text:
1121 Picture Rail
Most of our mouldings range are produced onsite in Burwood under strict quality controls. Many mouldings can be created to your own size specifications. If you need a particular size that is not listed – please ask us about availability.
Browse our full range Mouldings Catalogue > Flip style magazine format
Download PDF of Picture Rail Range > Picture Rail


text:
Complex Property Issues
The Law Office of Matthew J. Rudy makes an effort to have each case seem as simple and straightforward as possible, however some cases involve more complicated and complex issues. These issues often involve the characterization, valuation and division of assets.
While it can be helpful to seek the guidance of experienced counsel in any family law proceeding it becomes essential to do so when your case involves complex property issues. In addition to issues regarding the characterization, valuation and division of property, including business holdings and professional practices other complex property issues can arise with regards to the division of retirement accounts, particularly when contributions were made both during and outside of the marriage, when one or both parties receives compensation in the form of stock options or restricted stock units, when the parties hold international real or personal property and when one or both parties has received a legal settlement or judgment award arising out of a civil lawsuit.
If your case involves complex property issues and you would like to learn more about your legal rights and responsibilities and to schedule a free one hour consultation please Contact The Law Office of Matthew J. Rudy


text:
You have reached our Electronic Component Request for Quote (RFQ) Page where you can submit quote requests for desired part numbers like 12-14-W by 3M. 12-14-W item is immediately available for purchase but require the submission of an RFQ form, that way we can better understand your operational requirements. At Electronic Component Distribution, we pride ourselves in being able to meet our customers' needs; thus, we organize our expansive offerings according to their respective manufacturer and part number and various other designations so that individuals can find products that fit their specifications.
Note : We Will Not Share Your Information To Any Third Parties.
Electronic Component Distribution is a leading distributor of electronic components, but our scope is not limited to the industries that benefit from such items. In fact, we also carry parts and a wide range of other products by leading entities that are recognized for their commitment to maintaining a rigorous quality control program. As such, you can confidently request a competitive quote on part number 12-14-W today, letting one of our experts craft a customized solution within 15 minutes or less of submission. We invite you to experience how simple part procurement can be when you partner with Electronic Component Distribution.
"We Proudly Support Intrepid Fallen Heroes Fund that serves United States Military Personal experiencing the Invisible Wounds of War : Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and Post Traumatic Stress (PTS). Please visit website (www.fallenheroesfund.org) and help in their valiant effort".
If You're Ever Looking for Electronic Parts and Board Level Components, Don't forget That We offer Competitive Pricing and Guaranteed On-Time Delivery.
Request for Quote


text:
Wondering how to pay off your home loan sooner? We look at some things you could do.
Home loan interest rates remain at historic lows, and the opportunities for paying off a mortgage early are better than ever. Used in conjunction with low rates, here are some extra steps that can speed up loan repayments and reduce your loan balance.
Make higher repayments
One of the easiest ways to quickly reduce the balance of your mortgage is to make larger loan repayments. The minimum repayments required on a loan are calculated on the amount owing and the prevailing home loan interest rate. Repaying more than the minimum can cut the overall term of the loan and save you thousands of dollars in interest. A mortgage repayments calculator will quickly show what savings can be achieved.
Some lenders may charge you an early payment cost for paying your loan in advance. This is particularly the case with fixed-interest loans, so it's always best to check up-front. These costs can be large.
Make more frequent repayments
Home loans are often structured so that you make monthly repayments. But making fortnightly repayments instead can reduce the term of a loan and save interest. By making fortnightly repayments, you are paying the equivalent of half of your monthly repayment every two weeks. This allows you to make the equivalent of one extra monthly repayment per year. Extra repayments will ensure the loan balance is lower at the time of the month the interest is calculated.
Use an interest offset account
Most lenders allow you to package a mortgage with an interest offset account. An offset account allows you to reduce the amount of interest paid on your loan by offsetting the amount in the (offset) account against your loan balance. Wages and other income can be deposited into your offset account. Note that you don't earn interest on the funds in the offset account, and that offset is usually only available on variable rate loans.
Seek out lower rates
Although obvious, many borrowers take out a mortgage and then stop following the home loan market. With interest rates constantly changing, it pays to monitor the latest rates. If rates change, contact your lender or WeLend and ask if they can review the rate on your loan.
Don't take the rate cut
When a lender reduces the interest rate on its home loans, usually in line with a cut in official interest rates, your first thought may be to reduce your loan repayments accordingly. However, by maintaining your loan repayments, you effectively repay more than the minimum loan repayment. If it's possible to do so, this will help you cut the term of the loan and save on interest.
Pay both principal and interest
While you can make lower repayments by choosing an interest-only loan, doing so means the principal component of the loan will not be repaid while you are only paying interest.
Pay fees upfront
When initially taking out a mortgage, lenders will often roll the establishment costs and charges into the loan. While this may help the short-term budget, it's worth paying these costs separately to lower the overall balance of the loan from the start.
Use your home equity
As home prices rise, you build more equity in your property. Redrawing funds from a home loan to pay for renovations and other costs can be a much cheaper source of funds than others.
Set up a split loan
A split loan, sometimes referred to as a combination loan, enables borrowers to divide their mortgage into both variable and fixed components. By doing this, you can not only make extra payments on the variable component, but also lock in a lower fixed rate. Extra payments can often be made on the fixed loan too, up to a limit specified by the lender.
Get a financial package
You can often lock in a discounted loan rate with a financial package and also find special rates on other products and services. Putting those savings into your mortgage is a great way to get the best of both worlds.
With just a few easy steps, borrowers can significantly reduce the length of their mortgage and save thousands of dollars in the process. WeLend can assist you in setting everything up.
For more information on how you can pay off your home loan sooner, contact WeLend to discuss your options.
The real estate market can be tough for young adults, but as a parent you may be able to lend a helping hand. We...
read moreWondering how to pay off your home loan sooner? We look at some things you could do. Home loan interest rates remain at historic...
read moreHow have property prices fared over the last 12 months? Which way is the market headed? Here, we take a quick look at the...
read more


text:
Class 9 Physics Notes (Unit # 7) for Sindh Boards in PDF Format. The students of 9th Class, Matriculation, SSC Level Part-I, O-Level, Grade-IX who are studying the course/syllabus prescribed by Boards of Intermediate & Secondary Education, Sindh (Karachi, Hyderabad, Sukkur, Larkana, Shaheed Benazirabad (SBA)) can get benefit from these notes.
Class 9 Physics Notes (Unit # 7) for Sindh Boards (BISEs) for Matric, SSC, 9th Class:
Very Easy, Updated & Comprehensive Notes for all types of students i.e. Average / Extra Ordinary
About Our Notes:
- All academic material which includes notes, key books, guides, handouts, assignments, solutions, solved exercises, review questions, important questions, fill in the blanks, multiple choice questions (mcqs) are available free of cost in pdf format.
- The Schools & Colleges (Public & Private) and other institutions affiliated with Sindh Boards can surely get benefit to enhance their academic skills and get excellent marks/grades in the exams.
Important Instructions:
- To keep yourself updated about latest news, events and notes and other academic material, you can subscribe our social media pages. Like our Facebook page. Follow us on Twitter
- To subscribe free SMS updates write FOLLOW LINKTOSHAHZAD in an SMS and send it to 40404.
- Here is our YouTube Channel.
- To subscribe for Email updates from Subscribe Email Updates option in sidebar.
- It is informed that all academic material on this website is available free of cost for students/teachers. You can read/study online. Don't insist for provision of softcopies / pdf files as we are sorry to inform you in advance that we can't provide you due to some legal limitations. Hope you will understand and cooperate.
- You can promote us by becoming our ambassador and inform all around you (relatives, friends, youngsters etc.) about this website/blog so that all can utilize this material for a better cause of humanity to spread knowledge/skills.


text:
Saturday is Flag Day in Hong Kong
Saturday is flag day. The city of Hong Kong has developed a practical way to manage the host of worthwhile charity groups who want to solicit funds from the public. Saturday morning has been designated as flag day. Between 7:30 AM and 12:00 noon authorized groups may send volunteers onto the streets to request funds from the public for their organization's work. The organization must be government approved by the Department of Social Services and Welfare. Every Saturday approximately ten permits are awarded. No other groups except those ten are permitted to canvas on that day. The city is divided into ten sections and each group can solicit donations in the section assigned to them. Volunteers have special collection bags with their organization's name on it. Once you make a donation a small self-adhesive 'flag' or 'tag' is affixed to your clothing. That way fundraisers who meet you elsewhere know you have already donated and they don't approach you.
I really like this system. You don't constantly receive phone calls for donations. No one comes to your door to ask for money. You aren't approached on the street for money every time you go out. I know Saturday morning is collection morning so before I leave my apartment I get money ready to slip into the bag of the first volunteer I meet. As soon as I donate I receive a 'flag' and no one else approaches me. It's a sensible and organized way of doing things.
One Saturday thirty-five students at the school where I teach volunteered to be the flag day collection agents for Christian Action. This Hong Kong group does much needed work with the refugees in our city. Asylum seekers who land up in Hong Kong from troubled countries around the world face great hardships. The government refuses to recognize them so they are not eligible for welfare, health care or housing subsidies. They are not allowed to work, so are unable to support themselves while waiting for a third country to accept them. This makes even basic survival a challenge.
Christian Action helps them with food, medical services, social events, and education and with their applications for landed immigrant status in other countries.
Since 1997 when China took over Hong Kong nearly 150 mainland Chinese people enter Hong Kong every day. Unlike immigrants from other countries they are allowed to work and go to school in Hong Kong. However most of them have a very poor education and little vocational training. Christian Action helps these people too. They run day camps for the older Chinese children and babysitting cooperatives for the younger ones so their parents can work to support their families. They help school age children adjust the Hong Kong public schools and teach adults how to conduct themselves at job interviews. Christian Action also runs several orphanages in mainland China.
My students are aware of the work of Christian Action since its director is a member of our school board. She requested some of our students help with collecting money and handing out flags on September 1st. Thirty-five of our young people agreed to get up early one Saturday morning to help. They needed a teacher to supervise so I volunteered.
The kids were cheerful and polite and represented our school well. The public as always was generous and our bags were heavy with money when we turned them in at noon.
Hong Kong has developed an organized and positive way to do fund raising for charity. Maybe other cities will follow Hong Kong's example in the future and begin to organize flag days of their own.
* * * * *


text:
Information & Media
The latest news in Healthcare IT – straight to your inbox. Little Falls Hospital anticipates groundbreaking this spring for a brand new major care clinic in Dolgeville, based on Michael Ogden, president of Little Falls Hospital, part of Bassett Healthcare Network. Meet the primary baby born in 2019 at the Bassett Birthing Middle in Cooperstown. Lifestyle, sleep disturbance and coronary heart disease. William LeCates, MD, at present medical director and VP of Medical Affairs for BMC, has agreed to step in as Deputy President of Bassett Medical Middle while a transition workforce works to develop a plan of succession.
Flu season is upon us, and Bassett Medical Heart in Cooperstown broadcasts flu clinics for sufferers. In this video, Dr. Hellenthal describes the advantages of da Vinci robotic surgical procedure, including faster restoration time for sufferers. Proceeds generated by the tournament will help the work of the Mates of Bassett Healthcare Community to strengthen Bassett initiatives throughout central New York.
A health care provider finishing his medical coaching at Bassett hopes the outcomes of a recent research will improve data about nonalcoholic fatty-liver disease (NAFLD) and NAFLD-associated advanced fibrosis (scarring) of the liver. Bassett Healthcare Network colorectal surgeons at the moment are performing one of the advanced remedies for these conditions – robotic-assisted, minimally invasive surgery – at Bassett Medical Heart in Cooperstown.
The occasion raised $one hundred sixty,000 in help of the addition of a new state-of-the-artwork working room at Bassett Medical Heart that can enable talented surgical teams to accommodate extra complicated cases, carry out new, minimally invasive procedures and give sufferers faster recovery instances. The Friends of Bassett Healthcare Community will maintain its third annual Valentine's Soirée on Saturday night, Feb.
Co-situated with the Shands Jacksonville Hospital, the Jacksonville Well being Science Middle excels in training, analysis and affected person care that expresses our abiding values of compassion, excellence, professionalism and innovation. 28. The expansion will provide 14 one-bed room apartments, all giant sufficient for couples, in addition to a brand new fully staffed wellness and fitness heart to be used by all residents of Valley Residential Companies.


text:
You're thrift store shopping at your favorite store — like the Salvation Army I love in my hometown of Lancaster, Pennsylvania — when a unique looking garment catches your eye from between the racks. You pull the garment toward you, revealing a gorgeous silk dress with lucite buttons in an aquamarine blue color that resembles a shirtwaist style popular in the 1950s. Excitedly, you move in to examine the garment's designer, expecting to see a high-brow name or at the very least, a boutique label on such an exquisite piece.
But when you peer into the garment to examine the tag, you notice a foreign looking logo with a designer you've never seen before. You show the tag to your thrift shopping partner to see if she's ever seen anything like it before. She says that "No she has not, but do you think the piece might be vintage?" She has a good point, but how are you to know if you don't know how to identify or date vintage clothing. So you toss the dress into your cart for purchase without ever knowing its true vintage identity.
Since so many thrifters aren't vintage clothing experts but repeatedly experience the scenario above in their thrifting travels, I wanted to share three easy ways to spot vintage clothing in a thrift store so that no matter your experience level, you can have more confidence knowing that a foreign looking label is that of a vintage clothing garment. For tips on how to spot vintage in a thrift store, keep reading after the jump for insights on vintage clothing union tags, brand designs and Made in USA labels!
Deciphering the vintage era of a garment is like putting together a gigantic puzzle. The more missing pieces you uncover, the clearer the picture and the more confident your answer feels. While these three tips won't tell you the exact year or even the definitive era of a piece, they will point your detective skills in the right direction of where to learn more so that you can decide the true vintage style origin of your thrift store find for yourself. What are your tips for spotting vintage in a thrift store? Do you have a special strategy that I missed here?
Let me know in the comments below the post, or share your advice and insights with me on Facebook, Twitter or via email. And don't forget to follow me on Instagram!
Plus, stay tuned for a future post on thrift store shopping vintage labels and tags for the advanced!
xx, SD
Vintage Fashion Tips
THE SIGN: While you're combing the racks and flipping through pieces, you spot a tiny, funny looking tag you've never seen before with the acronym "ILGWU" on it. What you've just found is a "union" tag, identifying the piece as clothing made by a group of American workers who have banded together ("unionizing") for better employment opportunities and fair wages.
HOW TO SPOT IT: Look for union tags sewn immediately behind or next to the designer/label tag of a clothing garment. A union tag's design features a scalloped circle with a threaded needle diagonally behind it. In the center are the large letters ILGWU (International Ladies Garment Workers Union) crossed with the smaller acronym AFL-CIO. Around the edge is printed "Int'l Ladies Garment Workers Union." Union tags were printed in a variety of colors, so don't be surprised if you find red, black, blue or green printed on a white tag. Plus, a bonus for the more advanced: A tag's color can help shed light on the era a piece was most likely made.
VINTAGE FASHION TIPS: If the piece has a "union" tag sewn on its inside, you can confidently assume that it's vintage. This is because beginning in the '80s, most clothing was not produced by a clothing union and was rather outsourced for cheaper labor abroad. But before the majority of our clothing was made in Asian countries, the ILGWU employed the women who manufactured American clothing available for purchase at mainstream stores. In the '70s and earlier, anything not made by the union was most likely handmade by a specialty dressmaker or sewn together using a pattern by the wearer of the garment herself. Since the ILGWU was founded in 1900, the design of its union tags have changed several times and it's these changes which tell vintage clothing collectors the approximate era a piece was produced. These tips are better suited for the advanced thrifter, so be on the lookout for my upcoming post on advanced labels and tags identification. Here is your guide to identifying the era of an ILGWU union label!
THE SIGN: "Ooh! Saks Fifth Avenue, what a SCORE!" You think to yourself after spotting a bonafide Saks dress sold for a steal in the racks of your favorite thrift store haunt. But then you furrow your brow in puzzlement: This doesn't appear to be the Saks label you know and love. Could it be a knock-off instead? Most likely it's not a knock-off, but rather Saks from a vintage era! When you spot a recognizable brand with a clothing label not seen in stores today, chances are you've come across a piece from its vintage clothing archives.
HOW TO SPOT IT: When thrift store shopping, give each designer/label tag a second glance to identify whether it's of modern design. If your label's modernity seems questionable, look up the brand name in the Vintage Fashion Guild's label resource guide to compare your label's design next to the pictures available. Noting similarities between your tag and the vintage examples will help you to decide whether you've discovered a vintage piece or not. The VFG's label resource guide visually chronicles the various label designs of popular designers and brands, from icons such as Chanel, Diane von Furstenberg and Betsy Johnson to mall stores like The Gap, Abercrombie & Fitch and Banana Republic.
Source: The Vintage Fashion Guild
VINTAGE FASHION TIPS: Brands often change the design of their labels to redefine their image and to differentiate between separate clothing lines under the major umbrella of one company. With an illustrious 90-year-old history, Saks Fifth Avenue has presumably changed its tag design numerous times. Compare the Saks tag shown above to some of the tags from the 1960s on the Vintage Fashion Guild's guide. Note the similarities in font and how the words are placed at a diagonal from bottom left to an upper right. Using this information, it's safe to assume that based on the tag's design, that this Saks Fifth Avenue label is from the late '60s – early '70s. To more accurately mark the era of the piece itself, you'd consider other characteristics of the garment (style, material, construction) to confirm its true vintage era.
THE SIGN: It's a glorious privilege to be born as a — and thrift! — a Made in the USA item. When you discover vintage amongst the racks, chances are you're touching an American made product since offshore production didn't dominate the clothing industry until the '80s. Since vintage clothing is best described as any item of the '80s or earlier (following the 20 year rule), you should keep your eyes peeled for any American flag designs or locally made mentions on a garment's tag to help identify it as vintage.
HOW TO SPOT IT: Older vintage pieces produced before the '80s might have a "city/town, state" (like "Lancaster, Pa" above) reference on its tag. Pieces made in the '80s are tagged with a separate label that states "Made in USA" with an American flag emblem, or text stating "Made in the USA" printed alongside the brand name on the tag.
VINTAGE FASHION TIPS: Beginning in the '60s, clothing production in the US began to be outsourced for cheaper labor opportunities. It began with production outsourced only to Japan in the 1960s but by the '80s and into the '90s, most clothing was made in Taiwan, China, Eastern European, Singapore, Malaysia, China and Indonesia with hardly any left over to be produced in the good red, white and blue. By the late '70s, a campaign to support American made textiles had mushroomed and brands were promoting their patriotic allegiance to stateside manufacturing with red, white and blue tags like the one shown above. Before the '80s-current eras of outsourcing clothing production abroad, specialty stores produced garments locally and so for the wearer's reference, listed where it was made (by city and state normally) so they could remember where to visit the shop again. Remember, this was a time before digital yellow pages on the Internet!
Thank you to the Salvation Army of Lancaster, PA for permission to shoot photos in their store.
How to Date Vintage Clothing The ILGWU Union Label
Guide for Identifying Clothing Era
What is Deadstock Vintage? Vintage Tag History
Banana Republic, Betsy Johnson, Levi's & More The 7 Secrets to Pricing Vintage Fashion
Vintage Fashion Guild: Label & Tag Resource Guide
PLUS: Thrift Store Shopping Like a Pro Series


text:
The new .arab domain has been introduced to identify the Arab community online.
The new .arab extension will provide the Arab people a secure environment to spread and share their cultural, linguistic and historical heritage.
Type | New generic top level domain (NgTLD) |
Category | Geographical-Cultural |
The domain request is still under evaluation so the launch calendar for this new extension is not available yet.
As soon as details are announced, we will update this page with all the available information.
To be emailed, subscribe to our newsletter and receive all updates about domains in real time.
The application for the .arab domain was filed by League of Arab States on 12/04/2012 and the procedure will be carried out by ICANN by priority order 529 of 1930 applications.


text:
Jodie Sweetin is seeking a legal separation from her husband of just over a year, Morty Coyle, and a few other shared household possessions, TMZ reports.
The former Full House actress, 31, filed papers in a Los Angeles court on Monday, June 24, seeking a divorce and citing irreconcilable differences, the site first reported. This is Sweetin's third marriage.
"She seems in good spirits," a source tells Us Weekly. "She's sober still so she's in way better shape than last time. It's definitely true. I guess it's not working out."
A rep for the actress had no comment when reached by Us.
According to the court papers, Sweetin is seeking ownership of the couple's 2000 Toyota Avalon, as well as a 50/50 split of their $200 Kohl's credit card balance.
Additionally, the actress wants full custody of the couple's 2-year-old daughter Beatrix.
Sweetin and Coyle tied the knot in a private ceremony in Beverly Hills in March 2012, only announcing their wedding details on their one-year anniversary, on March 15, 2013.
In her explosive 2009 memoir, unSweetined, the former child star opened up about her troubled past, which included bouts of addiction to various drugs, including meth, ecstasy and coke.
"I got sober for good on December 7, 2008," she wrote in the memoir. "I was flying to L.A. and I ended up taking a bunch of Nyquil and drinking a sh-tload. …From that day forward, I threw myself into going to AA and avoided people who do blow off their coffee tables."
"But life is good," she continued. "I'm happier than I can remember."
Sweetin is also mother to Zoie Herpin, her 5-year-old daughter with ex-husband Cody Herpin.