http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/ http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html Any one making use of Google IPV6? Robert D. Scott Robert@ufl.edu Senior Network Engineer 352-273-0113 Phone CNS - Network Services 352-392-2061 CNS Phone Tree University of Florida 352-392-9440 FAX Florida Lambda Rail 352-294-3571 FLR NOC Gainesville, FL 32611 321-663-0421 Cell
Yes I do. I can use it but sometimes got trouble with teredo. Retry half an hour later works :) ipv6.google.com looks better to me than the IPv4 version does. More comfort. It is worth the trouble with teredo. Peter Robert D. Scott wrote:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
Robert D. Scott Robert@ufl.edu Senior Network Engineer 352-273-0113 Phone CNS - Network Services 352-392-2061 CNS Phone Tree University of Florida 352-392-9440 FAX Florida Lambda Rail 352-294-3571 FLR NOC Gainesville, FL 32611 321-663-0421 Cell
-- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter@peter-dambier.de http://www.peter-dambier.de/ http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/ ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 13:35 +0100, Peter Dambier wrote:
I can use it but sometimes got trouble with teredo. Retry half an hour later works :)
ipv6.google.com looks better to me than the IPv4 version does. More comfort. It is worth the trouble with teredo.
Um, are you sure you are using Google over IPv6? This is *not the same thing* as ipv6.google.com. Google over IPv6 is about accessing www.google.com via IPv6. For you to be doing this, you must have IPv6 connectivity and your IPv6 network must meet Google's fairly stringent requirements. Regards, K. -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Karl Auer (kauer@biplane.com.au) +61-2-64957160 (h) http://www.biplane.com.au/~kauer/ +61-428-957160 (mob) GPG fingerprint: 07F3 1DF9 9D45 8BCD 7DD5 00CE 4A44 6A03 F43A 7DEF
Karl Auer wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 13:35 +0100, Peter Dambier wrote:
I can use it but sometimes got trouble with teredo. Retry half an hour later works :)
ipv6.google.com looks better to me than the IPv4 version does. More comfort. It is worth the trouble with teredo.
Um, are you sure you are using Google over IPv6?
This is *not the same thing* as ipv6.google.com.
Google over IPv6 is about accessing www.google.com via IPv6. For you to be doing this, you must have IPv6 connectivity and your IPv6 network must meet Google's fairly stringent requirements.
Regards, K.
I see cname www.l.google.com and only IPv4 addresses :( sorry Peter -- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter@peter-dambier.de http://www.peter-dambier.de/ http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/ ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 18:27:59 +0100 Peter Dambier <peter@peter-dambier.de> wrote:
Karl Auer wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 13:35 +0100, Peter Dambier wrote:
I can use it but sometimes got trouble with teredo. Retry half an hour later works :)
ipv6.google.com looks better to me than the IPv4 version does. More comfort. It is worth the trouble with teredo.
Um, are you sure you are using Google over IPv6?
This is *not the same thing* as ipv6.google.com.
Google over IPv6 is about accessing www.google.com via IPv6. For you to be doing this, you must have IPv6 connectivity and your IPv6 network must meet Google's fairly stringent requirements.
Regards, K.
I see cname www.l.google.com and only IPv4 addresses :(
If you're part of the Google v6 program -- that is, if your network is listed by them as v6-suitable -- you'll get different DNS answers... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
In message <49CD0C9F.2040702@peter-dambier.de>, Peter Dambier writes:
Karl Auer wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 13:35 +0100, Peter Dambier wrote:
I can use it but sometimes got trouble with teredo. Retry half an hour later works :)
ipv6.google.com looks better to me than the IPv4 version does. More comfort. It is worth the trouble with teredo.
Um, are you sure you are using Google over IPv6?
This is *not the same thing* as ipv6.google.com.
Google over IPv6 is about accessing www.google.com via IPv6. For you to be doing this, you must have IPv6 connectivity and your IPv6 network must meet Google's fairly stringent requirements.
Regards, K.
I see cname www.l.google.com and only IPv4 addresses :(
Well talk to your ISP and have them turn up IPv6. :-) If they can't do native all the way to you, have them bring up a local tunnel server so they are in a position to diagnose problems with the entire tunnel path. Mark
sorry
Peter
-- Peter and Karin Dambier Cesidian Root - Radice Cesidiana Rimbacher Strasse 16 D-69509 Moerlenbach-Bonsweiher +49(6209)795-816 (Telekom) +49(6252)750-308 (VoIP: sipgate.de) mail: peter@peter-dambier.de http://www.peter-dambier.de/ http://iason.site.voila.fr/ https://sourceforge.net/projects/iason/ ULA= fd80:4ce1:c66a::/48
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews@isc.org
yup... and it is nice, adwords don't work pretty well (or at least on the GeoIP thingie), and i get less publicity to look at :-) --- Nuno Vieira nfsi telecom, lda. nuno.vieira@nfsi.pt Tel. (+351) 21 949 2300 - Fax (+351) 21 949 2301 http://www.nfsi.pt/ ----- "Robert D. Scott" <robert@ufl.edu> wrote:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
Robert D. Scott Robert@ufl.edu Senior Network Engineer 352-273-0113 Phone CNS - Network Services 352-392-2061 CNS Phone Tree University of Florida 352-392-9440 FAX Florida Lambda Rail 352-294-3571 FLR NOC Gainesville, FL 32611 321-663-0421 Cell
Robert D. Scott wrote:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
It's been my Firefox home page ever since it was available. Steve
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 08:18 -0400, Robert D. Scott wrote:
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever. daniel@jun1> traceroute www.google.com traceroute6 to www.l.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 2.388 ms 1.798 ms 1.712 ms 2 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 8.664 ms 8.480 ms 8.364 ms 3 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 8.624 ms 8.639 ms 8.719 ms Regards, Daniel.
On 27/03/09 11:59 PM, "Daniel Verlouw" <daniel@bit.nl> wrote:
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever.
Same. We've been participating since January and haven't had any problems: # traceroute6 www.google.com traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:c003::68), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 vl2-gw.cbr1.as24557.net.au (2405:5000:1:2::1) 0.492 ms 0.484 ms 0.501 ms 2 gi0-1-4.bdr1.syd1.as24557.net.au (2405:5000:1:4::21) 5.009 ms 5.048 ms 5.212 ms 3 AS15169.ipv6.sydney.pipenetworks.com (2001:7fa:b::14) 4.552 ms 4.538 ms 4.522 ms 4 2001:4860::29 (2001:4860::29) 157.930 ms 157.914 ms 149.638 ms 5 2001:4860:c003::68 (2001:4860:c003::68) 157.709 ms 156.651 ms 149.585 ms -Shaun
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009 00:20:26 +1100 Shaun Ewing <s.ewing@aussiehq.com.au> wrote:
On 27/03/09 11:59 PM, "Daniel Verlouw" <daniel@bit.nl> wrote:
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever.
Same.
We've been participating since January and haven't had any problems:
# traceroute6 www.google.com traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:c003::68), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 vl2-gw.cbr1.as24557.net.au (2405:5000:1:2::1) 0.492 ms 0.484 ms 0.501 ms 2 gi0-1-4.bdr1.syd1.as24557.net.au (2405:5000:1:4::21) 5.009 ms 5.048 ms 5.212 ms 3 AS15169.ipv6.sydney.pipenetworks.com (2001:7fa:b::14) 4.552 ms 4.538 ms 4.522 ms 4 2001:4860::29 (2001:4860::29) 157.930 ms 157.914 ms 149.638 ms 5 2001:4860:c003::68 (2001:4860:c003::68) 157.709 ms 156.651 ms 149.585 ms
It's working for me, too, though I noticed that tcptraceroute (at least the version I have) doesn't do well with ipv6.google.com. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 09:34 -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
It's working for me, too, though I noticed that tcptraceroute (at least the version I have) doesn't do well with ipv6.google.com.
seems to work fine from over here: # tcptraceroute6 www.google.com 80 traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7b8:3:30::<removed>, port 80, from port 62699, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 2001:7b8:3:30::2 (2001:7b8:3:30::2) 0.505 ms 0.246 ms 0.228 ms 2 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 1.664 ms 1.619 ms 1.641 ms 3 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 220.972 ms 174.560 ms 120.445 ms 4 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 9.101 ms [open] 9.196 ms 9.055 ms # tcptraceroute6 -V traceroute6: TCP & UDP IPv6 traceroute tool 0.9.3 ($Rev: 483 $) --Daniel.
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:46:50 +0100 Daniel Verlouw <daniel@bit.nl> wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 09:34 -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
It's working for me, too, though I noticed that tcptraceroute (at least the version I have) doesn't do well with ipv6.google.com.
seems to work fine from over here:
# tcptraceroute6 www.google.com 80 traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7b8:3:30::<removed>, port 80, from port 62699, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 2001:7b8:3:30::2 (2001:7b8:3:30::2) 0.505 ms 0.246 ms 0.228 ms 2 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 1.664 ms 1.619 ms 1.641 ms 3 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 220.972 ms 174.560 ms 120.445 ms 4 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 9.101 ms [open] 9.196 ms 9.055 ms
# tcptraceroute6 -V traceroute6: TCP & UDP IPv6 traceroute tool 0.9.3 ($Rev: 483 $)
Traceroute6 works; I'm talking about tcptraceroute, which is useful for seeing what happens to connections in the presence of ACLs, firewalls, and the like. I don't seem to have a tcptraceroute6. --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:46:50 +0100 Daniel Verlouw <daniel@bit.nl> wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 09:34 -0400, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
It's working for me, too, though I noticed that tcptraceroute (at least the version I have) doesn't do well with ipv6.google.com. seems to work fine from over here:
# tcptraceroute6 www.google.com 80 traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7b8:3:30::<removed>, port 80, from port 62699, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 2001:7b8:3:30::2 (2001:7b8:3:30::2) 0.505 ms 0.246 ms 0.228 ms 2 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 1.664 ms 1.619 ms 1.641 ms 3 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 220.972 ms 174.560 ms 120.445 ms 4 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 9.101 ms [open] 9.196 ms 9.055 ms
# tcptraceroute6 -V traceroute6: TCP & UDP IPv6 traceroute tool 0.9.3 ($Rev: 483 $)
Traceroute6 works; I'm talking about tcptraceroute, which is useful for seeing what happens to connections in the presence of ACLs, firewalls, and the like. I don't seem to have a tcptraceroute6.
Very cool. apt-get install ndisc6 gives me tcptraceroute6. Didn't know about tcptraceroute(6). Thanks for sharing! :)
Daniel Verlouw wrote:
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever.
Same experiences - it just works.
daniel@jun1> traceroute www.google.com traceroute6 to www.l.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 2.388 ms 1.798 ms 1.712 ms 2 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 8.664 ms 8.480 ms 8.364 ms 3 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 8.624 ms 8.639 ms 8.719 ms
Yes, but only www records have AAAA record, the domain (google.com without www prefix) is still IPv4 only. -- Grzegorz Janoszka
Their press would indicate that more than www is IPV6. When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where. Robert D. Scott Robert@ufl.edu Senior Network Engineer 352-273-0113 Phone CNS - Network Services 352-392-2061 CNS Phone Tree University of Florida 352-392-9440 FAX Florida Lambda Rail 352-294-3571 FLR NOC Gainesville, FL 32611 321-663-0421 Cell -----Original Message----- From: Grzegorz Janoszka [mailto:Grzegorz@Janoszka.pl] Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 10:55 AM To: Daniel Verlouw Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Google Over IPV6 Daniel Verlouw wrote:
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever.
Same experiences - it just works.
daniel@jun1> traceroute www.google.com traceroute6 to www.l.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 2.388 ms 1.798 ms 1.712 ms 2 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 8.664 ms 8.480 ms 8.364 ms 3 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 8.624 ms 8.639 ms 8.719 ms
Yes, but only www records have AAAA record, the domain (google.com without www prefix) is still IPv4 only. -- Grzegorz Janoszka
Robert D. Scott wrote:
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
No tuneling I think. We have with them several peerings, IPv6 native together with IPv4. -- Grzegorz Janoszka
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
They are peering over some IXPs and private peerings with native IPv6, and I believe Google like to check IPv6 connectivity before putting your DNS resolver addresses in a whitelist so AAAA records are returned. Regards, Rob
In a message written on Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 11:03:05AM -0400, Robert D. Scott wrote:
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
AFAIK you have to have native peering with them to be part of the pilot. At least, you did when we signed up. They may have relaxed that since. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
On 27/03/2009 15:26, Leo Bicknell wrote:
AFAIK you have to have native peering with them to be part of the pilot. At least, you did when we signed up. They may have relaxed that since.
According to a Google IPv6 talk I attended yesterday, they don't intend to relax that rule. Tunneling ipv6 connectivity over ipv4 is trash quality engineering and to be honest, its not a credible substitute for adequate ipv6 infrastructure. Nick
Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 27/03/2009 15:26, Leo Bicknell wrote:
AFAIK you have to have native peering with them to be part of the pilot. At least, you did when we signed up. They may have relaxed that since.
According to a Google IPv6 talk I attended yesterday, they don't intend to relax that rule. Tunneling ipv6 connectivity over ipv4 is trash quality engineering and to be honest, its not a credible substitute for adequate ipv6 infrastructure.
<facetious> Tunneling ipv4 over mpls is trash quality engineering and it's not a credible substitute for adequate ipv4 infrastructure. </facetious> Everything is a tunnel...
Nick
AFAIK you have to have native peering with them to be part of the pilot. At least, you did when we signed up. They may have relaxed that since.
According to a Google IPv6 talk I attended yesterday, they don't intend to relax that rule. Tunneling ipv6 connectivity over ipv4 is trash quality engineering and to be honest, its not a credible substitute for adequate ipv6 infrastructure.
<facetious> Tunneling ipv4 over mpls is trash quality engineering and it's not a credible substitute for adequate ipv4 infrastructure. </facetious>
Everything is a tunnel...
Indeed, but the differentiator here is that the transport for the tunnel in question also provides connectivity to the destination; i.e. - you can get to Google over IPv4. You do not (or, atleast I do not :)) have the option of connecting to Google "over" MPLS, Ethernet, etc. /TJ
On 1 Apr 2009, at 11:19, TJ wrote:
You do not (or, atleast I do not :)) have the option of connecting to Google "over" MPLS, Ethernet, etc.
r1.owls#show arp | inc 198.32.245.6 Internet 198.32.245.6 2 001f.128e.56f2 ARPA FastEthernet0/1 r1.owls#show ipv6 neighbors | inc 2001:478:245:1::6 2001:478:245:1::6 0 001f.128e.56f2 REACH Fa0/1 r1.owls# That's the router in my house connecting to Google using IPv4/IPv6 over ethernet over ATM. Do I win $5? :-) Joe
Heh ... perhaps I mis-used "using". My apologies, let me be more explicit: You do not connect to Google's services directly using Ethernet or ATM addressing/reachability, except to (cough) "tunnel" IP(v*) over those media. Same for frame relay, token ring, etc.etc.etc. Better? :) Now if you made it IPv6 over IPv4 over IPv4+GRE+IPsec over Ethernet over MPLS we would be talking FUN. And someone would be having WAY to much free time! /TJ PS - Yes, you win $5 - to be paid in Internet Dollars, and you didn't even need to go on strike to get them. (/southpark)
-----Original Message----- From: Joe Abley [mailto:jabley@hopcount.ca] Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 11:44 AM To: TJ Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Google Over IPV6
On 1 Apr 2009, at 11:19, TJ wrote:
You do not (or, atleast I do not :)) have the option of connecting to Google "over" MPLS, Ethernet, etc.
r1.owls#show arp | inc 198.32.245.6 Internet 198.32.245.6 2 001f.128e.56f2 ARPA FastEthernet0/1 r1.owls#show ipv6 neighbors | inc 2001:478:245:1::6 2001:478:245:1::6 0 001f.128e.56f2 REACH Fa0/1 r1.owls#
That's the router in my house connecting to Google using IPv4/IPv6 over ethernet over ATM. Do I win $5? :-)
Joe
On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 11:44:28AM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
On 1 Apr 2009, at 11:19, TJ wrote:
You do not (or, atleast I do not :)) have the option of connecting to Google "over" MPLS, Ethernet, etc.
r1.owls#show arp | inc 198.32.245.6 Internet 198.32.245.6 2 001f.128e.56f2 ARPA FastEthernet0/1 r1.owls#show ipv6 neighbors | inc 2001:478:245:1::6 2001:478:245:1::6 0 001f.128e.56f2 REACH Fa0/1 r1.owls#
That's the router in my house connecting to Google using IPv4/IPv6 over ethernet over ATM. Do I win $5? :-)
Joe
er... that would be 5.00 minus the 0.52 ATM cell tax. --bill
* Robert D. Scott:
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
Google seems to aim at Tier 1 status for IPv6. No transit, no tunneling.
On 27/03/2009, at 11:20 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
Google seems to aim at Tier 1 status for IPv6. No transit, no tunneling.
That seems to be the case, yep. It's an interesting plan. On 27/03/2009, at 8:03 AM, Robert D. Scott wrote:
Their press would indicate that more than www is IPV6.
Yep. Map tiles over IPv6 was turned on last week during the Google IPv6 Implementers meeting, and other stuff is IPv6 as well. The traffic jump was pretty big :-) [nward@dhcp-12df.meeting.ietf.org]~% host -t AAAA www.gmail.com | grep IPv6 googlemail.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::53 [nward@dhcp-12df.meeting.ietf.org]~% host -t AAAA maps.google.com | grep IPv6 maps.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::68 [nward@dhcp-12df.meeting.ietf.org]~% host mt0.google.com | grep IPv6 mt.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::88 mt.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::be mt.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::5b mt.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:b003::5d etc. etc. (mt[0-3].google.com are the same) -- Nathan Ward
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:20:42 +0100
* Robert D. Scott:
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
Google seems to aim at Tier 1 status for IPv6. No transit, no tunneling.
From their web page at http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/: "To qualify for Google over IPv6, your network must have good IPv6 connectivity to Google. Multiple direct interconnections are preferred, but a direct peering with multiple backup routes through transit or multiple reliable transit connections may be acceptable. Your network must provide and support production-quality IPv6 networking and provide access to a substantial number of IPv6 users. Additionally, because IPv6
problems with users' connections can cause users to become unable to access Google if Google over IPv6 is enabled, we expect you to troubleshoot any IPv6 connection problems that arise in your or your users' networks." So you need multiple IPv6 connections or one IPv6 connection with transit IPv6 support to get it. A university with a direct peering with Google and and Internet2 transit to google would probably qualify. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 11:03 -0400, Robert D. Scott wrote:
Their press would indicate that more than www is IPV6.
When I posted my original note, I was not really looking for end user feedback, but rather is anyone peering V6 with them on either a public fabric or private peer. Any idea if they have native V6 transit, or are tunneling, and to where.
Yes, for example reader, maps, picasa and gmail have IPv6 enabled as well. Groups, youtube and orkut don't have IPv6 enabled, it seems. Funny thing to see is that IPv6 latency is lower than the IPv4 latency: --- www.l.google.com ping6 statistics --- 54 packets transmitted, 54 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 8.302/9.038/12.639/0.989 ms --- www.l.google.com ping statistics --- 57 packets transmitted, 57 packets received, 0% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 13.780/15.739/35.764/4.055 ms Regards, Teun
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Daniel Verlouw <daniel@bit.nl> wrote:
On Fri, 2009-03-27 at 08:18 -0400, Robert D. Scott wrote:
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
yes. We participate in the Google IPv6 trial program so our recursors get AAAA records for www.google.com and so far it's been great, no issues whatsoever.
daniel@jun1> traceroute www.google.com traceroute6 to www.l.google.com (2001:4860:a003::68) from 2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 pr61.ams04.net.google.com (2001:7f8:1::a501:5169:1) 2.388 ms 1.798 ms 1.712 ms 2 2001:4860::23 (2001:4860::23) 8.664 ms 8.480 ms 8.364 ms 3 2001:4860:a003::68 (2001:4860:a003::68) 8.624 ms 8.639 ms 8.719 ms
Regards, Daniel.
Heard that they are somewhat picky about who they AAAA-enable. Our campus has had native IPv6 everywhere and upwards all the way to Geant for many years. We are thinking of applying in the hopes that it will boost IPv6 usage. Did you have any trouble getting them to IPv6-enable you? Anyone from Google in the list with any informative comment? Regards, Athanasios
Athanasios Douitsis <aduitsis@gmail.com> wrote:
Heard that they are somewhat picky about who they AAAA-enable. Our campus has had native IPv6 everywhere and upwards all the way to Geant for many years. We are thinking of applying in the hopes that it will boost IPv6 usage. Did you have any trouble getting them to IPv6-enable you? Anyone from Google in the list with any informative comment?
We have one hop in between (the german NREN), haven't had any issues getting it enabled. bschmidt@lxbsc01:~$ traceroute6 -q1 www.google.com traceroute to www.google.com (2001:4860:a005::68) from 2001:4ca0:0:f000:211:43ff:fe7e:3a76, port 33434, from port 38962, 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 vl-23.csr1-2wr.lrz-muenchen.de (2001:4ca0:0:f000::1) 0.612 ms 2 xr-gar1-te1-3-108.x-win.dfn.de (2001:638:c:a003::1) 0.429 ms 3 zr-fra1-te0-7-0-1.x-win.dfn.de (2001:638:c:c043::2) 8.273 ms 4 de-cix20.net.google.com (2001:7f8::3b41:0:1) 8.202 ms 5 2001:4860::34 (2001:4860::34) 20.122 ms 6 2001:4860:a005::68 (2001:4860:a005::68) 20.691 ms If you are only connected to GEANT your mileage will vary, as GEANT doesn't peer themselves there will be at least one additional hop in between (GBLX most likely). I think they want a decent path and a usable backup path, not sure whether Telia (the second Geant transit) is ready yet. I'd suggest you just try to contact them. Bernhard
In a message written on Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:18:50AM -0400, Robert D. Scott wrote:
Any one making use of Google IPV6?
We are in the trial: % traceroute6 -n www.google.com traceroute6 to www.l.google.com (2001:4860:b002::68) from 2001:4f8:3:bb::5, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1 2001:4f8:3:bb:203:47ff:fefd:ddab 0.350 ms 0.263 ms 0.233 ms 2 2001:4f8:3:c::1 0.734 ms 0.481 ms 0.613 ms 3 2001:4f8:0:4::3 4.602 ms 5.859 ms 5.234 ms 4 2001:4f8:0:1::45:1 78.206 ms 2.829 ms 1.858 ms 5 2001:504:d::1f 13.601 ms 1.607 ms 1.738 ms 6 2001:4860::30 80.442 ms 70.358 ms 68.369 ms 7 2001:4860:b002::68 70.092 ms 68.064 ms 68.021 ms Completely seamless from here. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Robert D. Scott wrote:
http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/032509-google-ipv6-easy.html
It's relatively easy to make _your own_ apps (i.e. ones you have the source for) support IPv6. Most companies, though, are completely reliant on their vendors, which means buying a new version, testing, deployment, etc. -- assuming the vendor is still in business, hasn't discontinued the product, has even bothered to try implementing IPv6 yet (most haven't), etc. That may also involve an upgrade of the OS that the app runs on, purchasing new hardware to handle the bloat in newer OSes, etc. You may also need to upgrade your LAN hardware to models that support IPv6 forwarding in hardware, more RAM for routers to run IPv6 code (if it's even available), new VPN boxes, etc. Now, if you keep up with your upgrades every year, and stop using products when the vendors stop supporting them or go out of business, most of this should already be built into your budgets -- but not many execs see value in that. "If it ain't broke so badly that it cuts into profits, you don't need any budget for it." S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
participants (26)
-
Athanasios Douitsis -
Bernhard Schmidt -
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Charles Wyble -
Daniel Verlouw -
Florian Weimer -
Grzegorz Janoszka -
Joe Abley -
Joel Jaeggli -
Karl Auer -
Kevin Oberman -
Leo Bicknell -
Mark Andrews -
Matthew Moyle-Croft -
Nathan Ward -
Nick Hilliard -
Nuno Vieira - nfsi telecom -
Peter Dambier -
Rob Evans -
Robert D. Scott -
Shaun Ewing -
Stephen Sprunk -
Steve Bertrand -
Steven M. Bellovin -
Teun Vink -
TJ