blogs.cisco.com not available via IPv6
Hi, can anybody from Cisco confirm that blogs.cisco.com (2001:4800:13c1:10::178) is not available via IPv6? Regards -- Henri Wahl IT Department Leibniz-Institut fuer Festkoerper- u. Werkstoffforschung Dresden tel: (03 51) 46 59 - 797 email: h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de http://www.ifw-dresden.de Nagios status monitor Nagstamon: http://nagstamon.ifw-dresden.de DHCPv6 server dhcpy6d: http://dhcpy6d.ifw-dresden.de IFW Dresden e.V., Helmholtzstrasse 20, D-01069 Dresden VR Dresden Nr. 1369 Vorstand: Prof. Dr. Juergen Eckert, Dr. h.c. Dipl.-Finw. Rolf Pfrengle
I'm seeing it down via IPv6: * Trying 2600:1407:9:295::90... * Connected to www.cisco.com (2600:1407:9:295::90) port 80 (#0)
< HTTP/1.1 200 OK * Server Apache is not blacklisted * About to connect() to blogs.cisco.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 2001:4800:13c1:10::178... ^C - Jared On Dec 4, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Henri Wahl <h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de> wrote:
My Cisco IPv6 contacts confirmed that they were made aware of this 12 hours ago and it's being worked on. Frank -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 8:23 AM To: Henri Wahl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: blogs.cisco.com not available via IPv6 I'm seeing it down via IPv6: * Trying 2600:1407:9:295::90... * Connected to www.cisco.com (2600:1407:9:295::90) port 80 (#0)
< HTTP/1.1 200 OK * Server Apache is not blacklisted * About to connect() to blogs.cisco.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 2001:4800:13c1:10::178... ^C - Jared On Dec 4, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Henri Wahl <h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de> wrote:
Thanks folks. Blogs.cisco.com should be back up now for both IPv4 and v6. Thanks, John "We can't help everyone, but everyone can help someone." John Stuppi, CISSP Technical Leader Strategic Security Research jstuppi@cisco.com Phone: +1 732 516 5994 Mobile: 732 319 3886 CCIE, Security - 11154 Cisco Systems Mail Stop INJ01/2/ 111 Wood Avenue South Iselin, New Jersey 08830 United States Cisco.com Think before you print. This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 9:23 AM To: Henri Wahl Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: blogs.cisco.com not available via IPv6 I'm seeing it down via IPv6: * Trying 2600:1407:9:295::90... * Connected to www.cisco.com (2600:1407:9:295::90) port 80 (#0)
< HTTP/1.1 200 OK * Server Apache is not blacklisted * About to connect() to blogs.cisco.com port 80 (#0) * Trying 2001:4800:13c1:10::178... ^C - Jared On Dec 4, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Henri Wahl <h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de> wrote:
Please dont reply back with such legal disclaimers. It is basically SPAM and of course nonsense. The thought that you can send a email and force your companies terms on us is rediculous. If CISCO forces that in your sig then for one tell them to fuck off and two use a different email. On Dec 5, 2013 3:56 PM, "John Stuppi (jstuppi)" <jstuppi@cisco.com> wrote:
*Sarcasm* but lawyers seem to think it is REALLY important to add that load to email servers, backup servers and storage :). I wonder how much extra storage those simple extra bits/bytes have taken over the years? ~Richard On Dec 5, 2013, at 6:39 PM, Rogan Schlassa <roganschlassa@gmail.com> wrote:
(A little late but) it's reachable for me -- Funny tho that something at cisco is IPv6 via a v4<->v6 (2001::) :-) jamie On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Geraint Jones <geraint@koding.com> wrote:
-- "sharp, dry wit and brash in his dealings with contestants." - Forbes If voting didn't matter, the GOP wouldn't make it more difficult than buying a gun. /* - teh jamie. ; uri -> http://about.me/jgr */
Jamie, methinks you are confusing 2002 with 2001.... Jared Mauch > On Dec 7, 2013, at 11:26 AM, jamie rishaw <j@arpa.com> wrote: > > (A little late but) it's reachable for me -- Funny tho that something at > cisco is IPv6 via a v4<->v6 (2001::) :-) > > jamie > > >> On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Geraint Jones <geraint@koding.com> wrote: >> >> Its the reason deduplication makes the storage savings it does :) >> -- >> Geraint Jones >> >> >> >> >>> On 6/12/13 2:52 pm, "Richard Porter" <richard@pedantictheory.com> wrote: >>> >>> *Sarcasm* but lawyers seem to think it is REALLY important to add that >>> load to email servers, backup servers and storage :). I wonder how much >>> extra storage those simple extra bits/bytes have taken over the years? >>> >>> ~Richard >>> >>> On Dec 5, 2013, at 6:39 PM, Rogan Schlassa <roganschlassa@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Please dont reply back with such legal disclaimers. It is basically >>>> SPAM >>>> and of course nonsense. >>>> >>>> The thought that you can send a email and force your companies terms on >>>> us >>>> is rediculous. >>>> >>>> If CISCO forces that in your sig then for one tell them to fuck off and >>>> two >>>> use a different email. >>>> On Dec 5, 2013 3:56 PM, "John Stuppi (jstuppi)" <jstuppi@cisco.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Thanks folks. Blogs.cisco.com should be back up now for both IPv4 and >>>>> v6. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> "We can't help everyone, but everyone can help someone." >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> John Stuppi, CISSP >>>>> Technical Leader >>>>> Strategic Security Research >>>>> jstuppi@cisco.com >>>>> Phone: +1 732 516 5994 >>>>> Mobile: 732 319 3886 >>>>> >>>>> CCIE, Security - 11154 >>>>> Cisco Systems >>>>> Mail Stop INJ01/2/ >>>>> 111 Wood Avenue South >>>>> Iselin, New Jersey 08830 >>>>> United States >>>>> Cisco.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Think before you print. >>>>> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the >>>>> sole >>>>> use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or >>>>> disclosure >>>>> by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended >>>>> recipient (or >>>>> authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by >>>>> reply email and delete all copies of this message. >>>>> For corporate legal information go to: >>>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 9:23 AM >>>>> To: Henri Wahl >>>>> Cc: NANOG list >>>>> Subject: Re: blogs.cisco.com not available via IPv6 >>>>> >>>>> I'm seeing it down via IPv6: >>>>> >>>>> * Trying 2600:1407:9:295::90... >>>>> * Connected to www.cisco.com (2600:1407:9:295::90) port 80 (#0) >>>>>> GET / HTTP/1.1 >>>>>> User-Agent: curl/7.30.0 >>>>>> Host: www.cisco.com >>>>>> Accept: */* >>>>> < HTTP/1.1 200 OK >>>>> * Server Apache is not blacklisted >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> * About to connect() to blogs.cisco.com port 80 (#0) >>>>> * Trying 2001:4800:13c1:10::178... >>>>> ^C >>>>> >>>>> - Jared >>>>> >>>>>> On Dec 4, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Henri Wahl <h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> can anybody from Cisco confirm that blogs.cisco.com >>>>>> (2001:4800:13c1:10::178) is not available via IPv6? >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Henri Wahl >>>>>> >>>>>> IT Department >>>>>> Leibniz-Institut fuer Festkoerper- u. >>>>>> Werkstoffforschung Dresden >>>>>> >>>>>> tel: (03 51) 46 59 - 797 >>>>>> email: h.wahl@ifw-dresden.de >>>>>> http://www.ifw-dresden.de >>>>>> >>>>>> Nagios status monitor Nagstamon: >>>>>> http://nagstamon.ifw-dresden.de >>>>>> >>>>>> DHCPv6 server dhcpy6d: >>>>>> http://dhcpy6d.ifw-dresden.de >>>>>> >>>>>> IFW Dresden e.V., Helmholtzstrasse 20, D-01069 Dresden VR Dresden Nr. >>>>>> 1369 >>>>>> Vorstand: Prof. Dr. Juergen Eckert, Dr. h.c. Dipl.-Finw. Rolf Pfrengle >>>>>> <0x1FBA0942.asc> > > > -- > "sharp, dry wit and brash in his dealings with contestants." - Forbes > If voting didn't matter, the GOP wouldn't make it more difficult than > buying a gun. > /* - teh jamie. ; uri -> http://about.me/jgr */
On 12/5/13 5:39 PM, Rogan Schlassa wrote:
These typically get one of the following from me: NOTICE: This communication may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient or believe that you have received this communication in error you are obligated to kill yourself and anyone else who may have read it, not necessarily in that order. So there. My disclaimer is scarier than yours. Nyaah. You started this silly nonsense. Knock it off and I will too, ok? It's worthless from a legal standpoint and is responsible for the needless suffering of billions of innocent electrons. Nobody reads it anyway. You're not actually reading this, are you? I didn't think so. NOTICE: By sending email to any of my addresses you are agreeing that: 1. I am by definition, "the intended recipient". 2. All information in the email is mine to do with as I see fit and make such financial profit, political mileage, or good joke as it lends itself to. In particular, I may quote it on newsgroups, forums, and mailing lists. 3. I may take the contents as representing the views of your company. 4. This overrides any disclaimer or statement of confidentiality that may be included on your message. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay@impulse.net Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
participants (11)
-
Frank Bulk -
Geraint Jones -
Henri Wahl -
jamie rishaw -
Jared Mauch -
Jay Hennigan -
John Stuppi (jstuppi) -
Mark Townsley -
Michael Smith -
Richard Porter -
Rogan Schlassa