IPv6 day fun is beginning!
www.juniper.net is on IPv6 www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though www.level3.com works fine over v4 but shows a 404 over IPv6 www.simobil.si is temporarily unavailable over IPv6 but works fine over IPv4
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6. - Jared
On 6/7/2011 6:15 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared
At this second, I don't see the AAAA, though they may only be providing it to v6 dns servers? Jack
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:19 PM, Jack Bates wrote:
On 6/7/2011 6:15 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared
At this second, I don't see the AAAA, though they may only be providing it to v6 dns servers?
They were serving up 2620:0:1cff:ff01::23 from my universe, but it was not accepting tcp/80 requests. They also may have pulled the trigger a bit earlier than expected.. This may explain the problem if people confused 2300 with 0000 due to daylight savings time or something else. - Jared
No issues connecting to FB for me on IPv6 (both to www.v6.facebook.com and to the AAAA returned by www.facebook.com now). Interesting (perhaps) side note - www.facebook.com has a AAAA, but "facebook.com" does not. Google / Youtube records are up and running nicely also. J. -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6. - Jared
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Herbert" <John.Herbert@usc-bt.com>
No issues connecting to FB for me on IPv6 (both to www.v6.facebook.com and to the AAAA returned by www.facebook.com now).
Interesting (perhaps) side note - www.facebook.com has a AAAA, but "facebook.com" does not.
And "thefacebook.com"? :-) Cheers, -- jr 'Yes; that's operational. How many obscure aliases do *you* have?' a -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
On 06/07/2011 07:22 PM, John.Herbert@usc-bt.com wrote:
No issues connecting to FB for me on IPv6 (both to www.v6.facebook.com and to the AAAA returned by www.facebook.com now).
Interesting (perhaps) side note - www.facebook.com has a AAAA, but "facebook.com" does not.
Google / Youtube records are up and running nicely also.
J.
-----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning!
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared Here I don't see any v6 for either facebook.com or www.facebook.com (I run my own resolver from within comcast, and the resolver and my boxes are all v6 enabled and dual-stacked, have been for over a year).
I did see a cute pair of puns in cisco's v6-day address: cisco.v6day.akadns.net has IPv6 address 2001:420:80:1:c:15c0:d06:f00d (check the last 32 bits, and the 32 before...) -- Pete
On 06/07/2011 07:56 PM, Pete Carah wrote:
On 06/07/2011 07:22 PM, John.Herbert@usc-bt.com wrote:
No issues connecting to FB for me on IPv6 (both to www.v6.facebook.com and to the AAAA returned by www.facebook.com now).
Interesting (perhaps) side note - www.facebook.com has a AAAA, but "facebook.com" does not.
Google / Youtube records are up and running nicely also. .... Here I don't see any v6 for either facebook.com or www.facebook.com (I run my own resolver from within comcast, and the resolver and my boxes are all v6 enabled and dual-stacked, have been for over a year).
Google must be exercising very fine control over their dns; it turned v6 on at 19:58 exactly. Yahoo's is still not on as seen from here. www.facebook.com (but not facebook.com) just turned on here too (after google). another hex-speak spelling... -- Pete
On 8 jun 2011, at 2:02, Pete Carah wrote:
www.facebook.com (but not facebook.com) just turned on here too (after google). another hex-speak spelling...
I'm using my iPhone as the IPv6-only canary. www.facebook.com now seems to work, but it redirects to m.facebook.com which doesn't have IPv6. This seems to be a trend, yahoo and cnn do the same thing. Annoying.
On Jun 7, 2011, at 8:08 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
On 8 jun 2011, at 2:02, Pete Carah wrote:
www.facebook.com (but not facebook.com) just turned on here too (after google). another hex-speak spelling...
I'm using my iPhone as the IPv6-only canary. www.facebook.com now seems to work, but it redirects to m.facebook.com which doesn't have IPv6. This seems to be a trend, yahoo and cnn do the same thing. Annoying.
Props to google for doing it right, e.g.: maps.googleapis.com AAAA gg.google.com AAAA safebrowsing.clients.google.com AAAA Thank you google! - Jared
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net>
Props to google for doing it right, e.g.:
maps.googleapis.com AAAA gg.google.com AAAA safebrowsing.clients.google.com AAAA
Thank you google!
Funny you bring up "getting all the subsidiary sties right". I tried to comment on an NPR story last night, to find that their AJAX comment popup points to *an HTTPS* server... whose cert expired at 1752 on 6/6. I pointed that out to both @nprtechteam and @acarvin around 10pET when I noticed it... and got no reply from either, which is slightly unusual for them. Worst part: Unscrollable box, so I *couldn't* just bypass it even if I'd wanted to. Oops, Mozilla... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Anyone with native v6 want to help me test my content? I don't have any v6 access from anything except a few dedicated servers yet. Off list response is fine :) -----Original Message----- From: TJ [mailto:trejrco@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 6:32 PM To: NANOG Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 20:14, Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
Props to google for doing it right, e.g.:
maps.googleapis.com AAAA gg.google.com AAAA safebrowsing.clients.google.com AAAA
Thank you google!
- Jared
... and Gmail, too ... /TJ
On 8 Jun 2011, at 02:13, TJ wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 21:04, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>wrote:
On 8 jun 2011, at 2:31, TJ wrote:
... and Gmail, too ...
imap.gmail.com only has IPv4, though.
Good catch, applies to pop & smtp as well. Baby steps, I guess? /TJ
Sadly, although I can connect over IPv6 to Gmail an email sent from within the browser to an IPv6-only address (AAAA but also an MX) still gives the "DNS Error: DNS server returned answer with no data" message. Transport is one thing but getting applications working with an IPv6 world will take longer (not that it is that hard :-) ) Cheers Neil -- Neil Long, Team Cymru
On 6/8/11 1:29 AM, Neil Long wrote:
On 8 Jun 2011, at 02:13, TJ wrote:
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 21:04, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>wrote:
On 8 jun 2011, at 2:31, TJ wrote:
... and Gmail, too ...
imap.gmail.com only has IPv4, though.
Good catch, applies to pop & smtp as well. Baby steps, I guess? /TJ
Sadly, although I can connect over IPv6 to Gmail an email sent from within the browser to an IPv6-only address (AAAA but also an MX) still gives the "DNS Error: DNS server returned answer with no data" message.
Transport is one thing but getting applications working with an IPv6 world will take longer (not that it is that hard :-) )
I've been doing IPv6 with SMTP and POP3/IMAP for quite a while now without any magic tricks. In fact, I've found SMTP to be a far better test in the early days since it's non-interactive and invisible to the customer if it took time to fall back to IPv4. ~Seth
TJ <trejrco@gmail.com> wrote:
... and Gmail, too ...
Except they are not relaying mail over v6. Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch <dot@dotat.at> http://dotat.at/ South Utsire: Variable 3 or 4, but in far southeast, easterly 5 at first and becoming westerly 5 to 7 later. Slight or moderate. Rain then showers. Poor, becoming good.
On 06/07/2011 08:08 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
I'm using my iPhone as the IPv6-only canary. www.facebook.com now seems to work, but it redirects to m.facebook.com which doesn't have IPv6. This seems to be a trend, yahoo and cnn do the same thing. Annoying.
Indeed. Verizon LTE is v6 enabled but the user-agent on my phone denies me an IPv6 experience.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Ryanczak" <ryanczak@gmail.com>
Indeed. Verizon LTE is v6 enabled but the user-agent on my phone denies me an IPv6 experience.
I thought I'd heard that LTE transport was *IPv6 only*... Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
* Jay Ashworth (jra@baylink.com) wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Ryanczak" <ryanczak@gmail.com>
Indeed. Verizon LTE is v6 enabled but the user-agent on my phone denies me an IPv6 experience.
I thought I'd heard that LTE transport was *IPv6 only*...
LTE supports both IPv4 and IPv6 (of course) but some operators deploy IPv6 only (with NAT64). (e.g. T-mobile, although their '4G' network is actually 3G with the latest high speed features, +1 for innovative marketing department) /Joakim
On Jun 7, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Ryanczak" <ryanczak@gmail.com>
Indeed. Verizon LTE is v6 enabled but the user-agent on my phone denies me an IPv6 experience.
I thought I'd heard that LTE transport was *IPv6 only*...
you may have but it's wrong. lte supports ipv4 ipv6 and dual stack contexts.
Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
Sent from my iPad On 2011-06-08, at 5:09 AM, Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> wrote:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 5:32 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Ryanczak" <ryanczak@gmail.com>
Indeed. Verizon LTE is v6 enabled but the user-agent on my phone denies me an IPv6 experience.
I thought I'd heard that LTE transport was *IPv6 only*...
you may have but it's wrong. lte supports ipv4 ipv6 and dual stack contexts.
Correct. The bearer service (connection perceived by user) can be IPv4-only, IPv6-only or dual stack for LTE (more correctly - the Evolved Packet System). The actual transport (mobile nodes talking to each other conducting signaling and tunneling customer traffic) can be IPv4 and/or IPv6. Regards, Victor K
Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274
On 8 jun 2011, at 2:02, Pete Carah wrote:
www.facebook.com (but not facebook.com) just turned on here too (after google). another hex-speak spelling... I'm using my iPhone as the IPv6-only canary. www.facebook.com now seems to work, but it redirects to m.facebook.com which doesn't have IPv6. This seems to be a trend, yahoo and cnn do the same thing. Annoying. My iphone picks up a v6 address from our wireless network but not from AT&T as far as I can tell.
google actually enabled a v6 address for at least part of their picture cdn along with the top page. I might try the iphone since it gets redirected to m.* a lot, though I'd presume (Cameron notwithstanding...) that very few of the participants are enabling their mobile infrastructure for v6 yet. OTOH, see: %host m.google.com m.google.com is an alias for mobile.l.google.com. mobile.l.google.com has address 72.14.204.193 mobile.l.google.com has IPv6 address 2001:4860:800f::c1 So far, looks like Google has done a good job. I don't know if they are doing any of their geolocation-based dns on the v6 stuff; my v6 address is from HE at ashburn... -- Pete
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:22 58PM, <John.Herbert@usc-bt.com> <John.Herbert@usc-bt.com> wrote:
No issues connecting to FB for me on IPv6 (both to www.v6.facebook.com and to the AAAA returned by www.facebook.com now).
Interesting (perhaps) side note - www.facebook.com has a AAAA, but "facebook.com" does not.
Google / Youtube records are up and running nicely also.
J.
I was hoping for a v6 Google logo.... --Steve Bellovin, https://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
What seems evident, looking at http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2011/06/monitoring-world-ipv6-day/ is that a lot of folks switched it on - and then switched it off again pretty damn quick! -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org -------------------------------------------------------------- -
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Joly MacFie <joly@punkcast.com> wrote:
What seems evident, looking at http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2011/06/monitoring-world-ipv6-day/ is that a lot of folks switched it on - and then switched it off again pretty damn quick!
Or ... folks switched it on and then it switched itself off again pretty damn fast when their hardware blew up. Either way would, though, match my experience.
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 03:48:52PM -0400, Joly MacFie wrote:
What seems evident, looking at http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2011/06/monitoring-world-ipv6-day/ is that a lot of folks switched it on - and then switched it off again pretty damn quick!
I'd attribute that spike to "people actively testing around for all those participants actually working". It was 2am +/- in the night in central europe (which has probably the biggest IPv6 enabled eyeball population)... what do you expect? Those who stayed up that late (I didn't) probably poked around at a few sites, noticed nothing's blowing up in gross colors, and went to bed. :-) I'm not surprised at all about the pattern. I would have expected higher amplitudes though, but given that major sites seem to deliver only index.html via IPv6, not much of a surprise there as well. Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr@cluenet.de -- dr@IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0
On 08/06/2011 22:58, Daniel Roesen wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 03:48:52PM -0400, Joly MacFie wrote:
What seems evident, looking at http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2011/06/monitoring-world-ipv6-day/ is that a lot of folks switched it on - and then switched it off again pretty damn quick!
I'd attribute that spike to "people actively testing around for all those participants actually working".
I agree. It appears to be mainly the 'native' traffic that spiked - native typically isn't the mom 'n pops at home. I know that when I woke up and found that my Youtube content was coming over v6, I used the opportunity to load test my infrastructure. ;-) -- Graham Beneke
This is from Sweden. $ dig any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61742 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN ANY ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com. ;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: glb1.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.239.10 glb2.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.255.10 ;; Query time: 58 msec ;; SERVER: 204.74.66.132#53(204.74.66.132) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 02:01:37 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 104 No AAAA records at the moment. Checked alll their nameservers. -- //fredan
I'm getting v6 for facebook now. -Randy -- | Randy Carpenter | Vice President - IT Services | Red Hat Certified Engineer | First Network Group, Inc. | (800)578-6381, Opt. 1 ---- ----- Original Message -----
This is from Sweden.
$ dig any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61742 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN ANY
;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: glb1.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.239.10 glb2.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.255.10
;; Query time: 58 msec ;; SERVER: 204.74.66.132#53(204.74.66.132) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 02:01:37 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 104
No AAAA records at the moment. Checked alll their nameservers.
-- //fredan
That is expected, the CDN is not IPv6 enabled (yet) On 6/7/11 5:24 PM, "Rémy Sanchez" <remy.sanchez@hyperthese.net> wrote:
On 06/08/2011 02:13 AM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
I'm getting v6 for facebook now.
www.facebook.com is v6 here, but I see no AAAA for the fbcdn.net subdomains.
-- Rémy Sanchez
On 6/7/2011 17:04, fredrik danerklint wrote:
This is from Sweden.
$ dig any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61742 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN ANY
;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: glb1.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.239.10 glb2.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.255.10
;; Query time: 58 msec ;; SERVER: 204.74.66.132#53(204.74.66.132) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 02:01:37 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 104
No AAAA records at the moment. Checked alll their nameservers.
Same results here, western US. ~Seth
On 6/7/2011 7:13 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote:
On 6/7/2011 17:04, fredrik danerklint wrote:
This is from Sweden.
$ dig any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com
;<<>> DiG 9.7.3<<>> any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61742 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN ANY
;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: glb1.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.239.10 glb2.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.255.10
;; Query time: 58 msec ;; SERVER: 204.74.66.132#53(204.74.66.132) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 02:01:37 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 104
No AAAA records at the moment. Checked alll their nameservers.
Same results here, western US.
This appears to be normal, but check the authoritative servers it gives. ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com. They respond with AAAA with aa bit set.
That's because you're asking the wrong nameservers. The response you're getting is pointing you to the correct nameservers (glb1/glb2.facebook.com) which are defintely returning AAAA records for me : $ dig +short aaaa www.facebook.com @glb1.facebook.com 2620:0:1c08:4000:face:b00c:0:3 Scott. On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:04 PM, fredrik danerklint <fredan-nanog@fredan.se>wrote:
This is from Sweden.
$ dig any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com
; <<>> DiG 9.7.3 <<>> any www.facebook.com @ns1.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 61742 ;; flags: qr rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 2, ADDITIONAL: 2 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available
;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN ANY
;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb1.facebook.com. www.facebook.com. 86400 IN NS glb2.facebook.com.
;; ADDITIONAL SECTION: glb1.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.239.10 glb2.facebook.com. 3600 IN A 69.171.255.10
;; Query time: 58 msec ;; SERVER: 204.74.66.132#53(204.74.66.132) ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 8 02:01:37 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 104
No AAAA records at the moment. Checked alll their nameservers.
-- //fredan
On 6/7/2011 17:16, Scott Howard wrote:
That's because you're asking the wrong nameservers. The response you're getting is pointing you to the correct nameservers (glb1/glb2.facebook.com) which are defintely returning AAAA records for me :
$ dig +short aaaa www.facebook.com @glb1.facebook.com 2620:0:1c08:4000:face:b00c:0:3
Now I'm seeing it. Quite the short TTL: ; <<>> DiG 9.6-ESV-R4 <<>> AAAA www.facebook.com @glb2.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34595 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN AAAA ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.facebook.com. 30 IN AAAA 2620:0:1c00:0:face:b00c:0:1 ;; Query time: 34 msec ;; SERVER: 69.171.255.10#53(69.171.255.10) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 7 17:32:31 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 62 Earlier I was getting no AAAA: ; <<>> DiG 9.6-ESV-R4 <<>> AAAA www.facebook.com @glb2.facebook.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 32876 ;; flags: qr aa rd; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; WARNING: recursion requested but not available ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.facebook.com. IN AAAA ;; AUTHORITY SECTION: www.facebook.com. 500 IN SOA glb01.sf2p.tfbnw.net. hostmaster.facebook.com. 2008102433 10800 3600 604800 86400 ;; Query time: 29 msec ;; SERVER: 69.171.255.10#53(69.171.255.10) ;; WHEN: Tue Jun 7 16:27:29 2011 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 101
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64. Jamie -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6. - Jared
On 2011-Jun-08 13:40, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including
Yesterday was 7th of June, World IPv6 day is happening now (since 00:00 UTC 8th of June) and still on for another 12 hours or so ;) But what you mention is something that has been seen a lot: people see the mention of IPv6 day and suddenly want IPv6 (which is a good thing btw and probably the most important thing) but instead of calling their ISP and asking it from them they get a tunnel. Getting IPv6 connectivity does not matter though as without IPv6 you'll just reach the IPv4 version of the site like you did yesterday and most likely tomorrow. As for your magic that you had to do to get a protocol 41 tunnel up and running, didn't HE.net have a PPTP trial for which they received a /15 or so from ARIN? Or did they actually not go on with it and are they now using that /15 for other services instead? Greets, Jeroen
If Verizon would offer v6 on FiOS, I'd already be there. They don't, so I've got a tunnel coming out of HE's Ashburn, VA POP. As far as me losing a day (or is it gaining?), blah...too early in the morning. It really is only Wednesday isn't it? Jamie -----Original Message----- From: Jeroen Massar [mailto:jeroen@unfix.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 7:52 AM To: Jamie Bowden Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On 2011-Jun-08 13:40, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including
Yesterday was 7th of June, World IPv6 day is happening now (since 00:00 UTC 8th of June) and still on for another 12 hours or so ;) But what you mention is something that has been seen a lot: people see the mention of IPv6 day and suddenly want IPv6 (which is a good thing btw and probably the most important thing) but instead of calling their ISP and asking it from them they get a tunnel. Getting IPv6 connectivity does not matter though as without IPv6 you'll just reach the IPv4 version of the site like you did yesterday and most likely tomorrow. As for your magic that you had to do to get a protocol 41 tunnel up and running, didn't HE.net have a PPTP trial for which they received a /15 or so from ARIN? Or did they actually not go on with it and are they now using that /15 for other services instead? Greets, Jeroen
On Jun 8, 2011, at 4:52 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
On 2011-Jun-08 13:40, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including
Yesterday was 7th of June, World IPv6 day is happening now (since 00:00 UTC 8th of June) and still on for another 12 hours or so ;)
But what you mention is something that has been seen a lot: people see the mention of IPv6 day and suddenly want IPv6 (which is a good thing btw and probably the most important thing) but instead of calling their ISP and asking it from them they get a tunnel.
Getting IPv6 connectivity does not matter though as without IPv6 you'll just reach the IPv4 version of the site like you did yesterday and most likely tomorrow.
As for your magic that you had to do to get a protocol 41 tunnel up and running, didn't HE.net have a PPTP trial for which they received a /15 or so from ARIN? Or did they actually not go on with it and are they now using that /15 for other services instead?
Greets, Jeroen
The PPTP trial is presently suspended pending resolution of certain performance issues we ran into with the PPTP servers. We are planning to move forward with it, but, I cannot provide any date information at this time. Owen
I have the same setup as you, except a Linux box that does the firewalling. The actiontec is pretty bad-ass, hardware-wise, and latest firmware versions give you a bit more freedom. Eth0 is the public addr and eth1 is the private addr. On Eth1 I've got a address from the routed /48 and then everything behind eth1 also gets addrs in that /48. (Maybe a firmware update is available for the Linksys? Or open/dd wrt). One thing to note, if you're not doing ipv6 filtering at the router. TCP/135 is open by default on a Windows 7 laptop here so if you're not filtering at the laptop then you're potentially allowing the world to access that port. Cheers, Harry -----Original Message----- From: Jamie Bowden [mailto:jamie@photon.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 7:40 AM To: NANOG list Subject: RE: IPv6 day fun is beginning! Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64. Jamie -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6. - Jared
The Actiontec is underpowered and if you put too many hosts behind it will run out of memory for its NAT tables and your connectivity goes to hell. My router is a D-Link not a Linksys. When I last upgraded my home router, the D-Links were plainly v6 capable; the Linksys may or may not have been, but if so, it wasn't on the box and since my old router was suffering from hardware problems, I wasn't really in the mood to go out to Linksys' web site and dig around to hopefully find out. That and Cisco has irritated me with their abandonment issues. My old Linksys was still running draft N code and hadn't seen a firmware update in two plus years. Five minutes after getting the D-Link up and running, I did have my HE tunnel though, which is nifty. As far as the firewall goes, it is doing SPI on both v4 and v6 with a default deny rule for all unrequested traffic. Jamie -----Original Message----- From: Harry Hoffman [mailto:hhoffman@ip-solutions.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 8:00 AM To: Jamie Bowden; 'NANOG list' Subject: RE: IPv6 day fun is beginning! I have the same setup as you, except a Linux box that does the firewalling. The actiontec is pretty bad-ass, hardware-wise, and latest firmware versions give you a bit more freedom. Eth0 is the public addr and eth1 is the private addr. On Eth1 I've got a address from the routed /48 and then everything behind eth1 also gets addrs in that /48. (Maybe a firmware update is available for the Linksys? Or open/dd wrt). One thing to note, if you're not doing ipv6 filtering at the router. TCP/135 is open by default on a Windows 7 laptop here so if you're not filtering at the laptop then you're potentially allowing the world to access that port. Cheers, Harry -----Original Message----- From: Jamie Bowden [mailto:jamie@photon.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 7:40 AM To: NANOG list Subject: RE: IPv6 day fun is beginning! Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64. Jamie -----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6. - Jared
I've done the same at home, HE tunnel for IPv6. I've got a Linksys WRT54GL running DD-WRT so getting it set up was relatively straight forward though I really need to fix the automatic startup script that's misbehaving. Work was another matter, one big headache, to the point where I'm wondering if something is interfering. OpenBSD box running pf acts as a router for us, HE tunnel comes up easily and works fine from box. rtadvd starts advertising the network range and every machine in the office picked it up. Briefly those workstations running Windows 7 in the office were able to use the tunnel (5 mins give or take). From then on I could see outbound and inbound IPv6 traffic on the BSD box, but it never seemed to reach the workstations. Tearing down, reconfiguring, checking out every guide under the sun, nothing worked :) Gave up in the end, I'll tackle it later when I've got time to waste. Would be nice if my $isp would sort out an IPv6 address range for us to use properly. Paul On 6/8/2011 1:40 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64.
Jamie
-----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning!
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared
Are you really on Cook Island in the Pacific or is your email headers date timezone string set incorrectly -1000. Your message won't be read by me until tonight shortly after 12:19 am. Sadly you'll miss IPv6 day :( Ryan Pavely Net Access Corporation http://www.nac.net/ On 6/9/2011 12:19 AM, Paul Graydon wrote:
I've done the same at home, HE tunnel for IPv6. I've got a Linksys WRT54GL running DD-WRT so getting it set up was relatively straight forward though I really need to fix the automatic startup script that's misbehaving. Work was another matter, one big headache, to the point where I'm wondering if something is interfering. OpenBSD box running pf acts as a router for us, HE tunnel comes up easily and works fine from box. rtadvd starts advertising the network range and every machine in the office picked it up. Briefly those workstations running Windows 7 in the office were able to use the tunnel (5 mins give or take). From then on I could see outbound and inbound IPv6 traffic on the BSD box, but it never seemed to reach the workstations. Tearing down, reconfiguring, checking out every guide under the sun, nothing worked :) Gave up in the end, I'll tackle it later when I've got time to waste. Would be nice if my $isp would sort out an IPv6 address range for us to use properly.
Paul
On 6/8/2011 1:40 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64.
Jamie
-----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning!
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared
Not cook islands. I am in Hawaii though so not a huge distance away. I'd got dual boot debian/windows and I had the tzlocation set wrong under Debian (GMT instead of local time). Boot back into Windows to test something and sent a few e-mails without noticing the time stamp was wrong. Paul On 6/8/2011 9:41 AM, Ryan Pavely wrote:
Are you really on Cook Island in the Pacific or is your email headers date timezone string set incorrectly -1000. Your message won't be read by me until tonight shortly after 12:19 am. Sadly you'll miss IPv6 day :(
Ryan Pavely Net Access Corporation http://www.nac.net/
On 6/9/2011 12:19 AM, Paul Graydon wrote:
I've done the same at home, HE tunnel for IPv6. I've got a Linksys WRT54GL running DD-WRT so getting it set up was relatively straight forward though I really need to fix the automatic startup script that's misbehaving. Work was another matter, one big headache, to the point where I'm wondering if something is interfering. OpenBSD box running pf acts as a router for us, HE tunnel comes up easily and works fine from box. rtadvd starts advertising the network range and every machine in the office picked it up. Briefly those workstations running Windows 7 in the office were able to use the tunnel (5 mins give or take). From then on I could see outbound and inbound IPv6 traffic on the BSD box, but it never seemed to reach the workstations. Tearing down, reconfiguring, checking out every guide under the sun, nothing worked :) Gave up in the end, I'll tackle it later when I've got time to waste. Would be nice if my $isp would sort out an IPv6 address range for us to use properly.
Paul
On 6/8/2011 1:40 AM, Jamie Bowden wrote:
Thanks to HE's tunnel broker service, I've got fully functional dual stack at home (well, mostly, like most folks, VZ gives me a single address and I live behind that with NATv4, but otherwise, I loves me some FiOS) and yesterday went by for me without a hitch, including accessing Facebook (I'd hear from the wife and kid really quickly if they weren't working). For a working tunnel, I put my DIR-825 as the "DMZ" host behind the cheesy Actiontec router VZ requires, forward all traffic with zero firewalling to it, and let the D-Link appliance handle all my firewall needs (and it terminates my v6 tunnel obviously). The one thing I haven't quite figured out how to make it do (and maybe it's just not capable) is use the /48 HE routes to me. The box insists that the internal interface be on the same subnet as the external, and it hands out v6 addresses from that /64.
Jamie
-----Original Message----- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:jared@puck.nether.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:15 PM To: Iljitsch van Beijnum Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning!
On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
If you go to www.v6.facebook.com it works, but it seems they have some problem on their main site. I am seeing some issues reaching them over IPv6.
- Jared
yahoo is already serving up the AAAA as well. Thanks Igor! Looking forward to seeing the traffic spike today :) - Jared On Jun 7, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.juniper.net is on IPv6
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
www.level3.com works fine over v4 but shows a 404 over IPv6
www.simobil.si is temporarily unavailable over IPv6 but works fine over IPv4
I'm observing our netflow of the ipv6 address-family from nodes where we're capable. It's not that interesting actually. I've seen larger spikes than what we're seeing [so far]. Akamai has a realtime IPv6 stats page as well here: http://www.akamai.com/ipv6 You can check out the hits/second peaks of what they're seeing. I do wonder if it will just taper off over time, or if we will see a big spike during the day in EU. I know for my "geeknet" here at home, I'm seeing all the ipv6 enabled properties flow through, mostly facebook and google, including the analytics site which actually is likely collecting the most interesting data of all. - Jared On Jun 7, 2011, at 10:09 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
Anybody keeping any realtime stats ?
-J
Thanks for the link Jared. I wonder how many eye-balls are really enabled to reach the IPv6 sites. Akamai's site doesn't show very impressive numbers, trying to figure why 300ms latency and >4% packet loss ? -J
On Jun 7, 2011, at 11:31 PM, Jorge Amodio wrote:
Thanks for the link Jared.
I wonder how many eye-balls are really enabled to reach the IPv6 sites. Akamai's site doesn't show very impressive numbers, trying to figure why 300ms latency and >4% packet loss ?
My guess is it's over the entire set of akamai properties hosted there, so cisco, bing, etc.. that all point to edgesuite and their related domains. The latency is likely due to suboptimal tunneling vs native. The density of IPv6 peering likely doesn't fully match the rest of the world either, sometimes you have to go across the country because someone can't do v6 on the local port. I do also find it interesting there's not a significant spike at the AMSIX IPv6 sFlow page either. http://www.ams-ix.net/sflow-stats/ipv6/ We have seen a traffic increase but nothing like what I was expecting, nay hoping to see. (i.e.: gigs and gigs of traffic - it does look like ~2x to me in an unscientific eye-look at a chart). Some of this may just be due to the methods used by the various sites to enable IPv6. (e.g.: main site only, not sub-sites, and not things like fbcdn etc). There are people listed on the ISOC site that are not serving up AAAA records either, so perhaps they are doing last minute testing and we will see an increase as a result. It's still early to measure a final result obviously, but the observation part is quite interesting for me now. I do hope to see more traffic over the next 12-24 hours. Maybe the "asia peak" time will be most interesting…. - Jared
On 8 Jun 2011, at 04:46, Jared Mauch wrote:
We have seen a traffic increase but nothing like what I was expecting, nay hoping to see. (i.e.: gigs and gigs of traffic - it does look like ~2x to me in an unscientific eye-look at a chart).
Some of it may be down to client behaviour. Despite Facebook being a 30 second TTL, I had to flush my MacOS X DNS cache before I'd get the new AAAA record. Tim
On Jun 8, 2011, at 4:32 AM, Tim Chown wrote:
On 8 Jun 2011, at 04:46, Jared Mauch wrote:
We have seen a traffic increase but nothing like what I was expecting, nay hoping to see. (i.e.: gigs and gigs of traffic - it does look like ~2x to me in an unscientific eye-look at a chart).
Some of it may be down to client behaviour. Despite Facebook being a 30 second TTL, I had to flush my MacOS X DNS cache before I'd get the new AAAA record.
My IPv4 is NATed but my IPv6 is not. I have a caching transparent cache for the IPv4 (squid) and watching the log made me notice similar behavior as well. Some systems were 'stuck' talking to the IPv4 address but were redirected to the v6 as a result of the squid proxy being dual-stacked. - Jared
On Jun 8, 2011, at 6:46 AM, Williams, Marcus (Contractor) wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Chown [mailto:tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:32 AM I had to flush my MacOS X DNS cache before I'd get the new AAAA record.
World IPv6 Day will be tomorrow.
Marcus Williams
World IPv6 day is today. It started at 0000 UTC June 8 and goes to just before 0000 UTC June 9. As I write this, there are approximately 10 hours remaining in world IPv6 day. Owen
On 2011-Jun-08 16:09, Owen DeLong wrote: [..]
World IPv6 day is today. It started at 0000 UTC June 8 and goes to just before 0000 UTC June 9. As I write this, there are approximately 10 hours remaining in world IPv6 day.
I think it is quite obvious that nothing serious broke anywhere ;) (read: not many users started whining that things didn't work) So folks, who are doing the 24-hour AAAA-on-your-site thing, maybe you can start pondering on keeping those records there, or are we afraid that the proxies set up lose too much of the oh-so-useful IP logs? Greets, Jeroen
Please pardon my sarcasm. My point was these AAAA records may linger in dns cache tomorrow, even if the corresponding IPv6 web site is turned off 0000 UTC June 9, and the records are removed. Marcus Williams
-----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen@delong.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 10:09 AM To: Williams, Marcus (Contractor) Cc: Tim Chown; NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning!
On Jun 8, 2011, at 6:46 AM, Williams, Marcus (Contractor) wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Tim Chown [mailto:tjc@ecs.soton.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 4:32 AM I had to flush my MacOS X DNS cache before I'd get the new AAAA record.
World IPv6 Day will be tomorrow.
Marcus Williams
World IPv6 day is today. It started at 0000 UTC June 8 and goes to just before 0000 UTC June 9. As I write this, there are approximately 10 hours remaining in world IPv6 day.
Owen
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 users in our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. Unfortunately, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only about 2-8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just people plugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I wonder how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. John -----Original Message----- From: Jorge Amodio [mailto:jmamodio@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 8:32 PM To: Jared Mauch Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! Thanks for the link Jared. I wonder how many eye-balls are really enabled to reach the IPv6 sites. Akamai's site doesn't show very impressive numbers, trying to figure why 300ms latency and >4% packet loss ? -J
In message <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 users i= n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. Unfortunat= ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only about 2-= 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just people p= lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I wonder = how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers.
John
If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 users i= n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. Unfortunat= ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only about 2-= 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just people p= lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I wonder = how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers.
John
If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*.
The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a 10% premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition. I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days. Owen
In message <B7872A58-DE28-4CC2-8929-931FD3CE019C@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 = users i=3D n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. = Unfortunat=3D ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only = about 2-=3D 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just =
lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I = wonder =3D how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. =20 John =20 If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. =20 The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a 10%
=20 In message = <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes: people p=3D premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition.
I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days.
Owen
Wireless G Modem Router $79.00 v4 G N-150 $79.95 v4 G DIR-615 $129.00 v4/v6 G/N DIR-815 $199.95 v4/v6 G/N The IPv6 price point is still well above the IPv4 only price point. 1.00AUD = 1.06USD -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:46 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
In message <B7872A58-DE28-4CC2-8929-931FD3CE019C@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 = users i=3D n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. = Unfortunat=3D ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only = about 2-=3D 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just =
lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I = wonder =3D how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. =20 John =20 If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. =20 The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a 10%
=20 In message = <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes: people p=3D premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition.
I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days.
Owen
Wireless G Modem Router $79.00 v4 G N-150 $79.95 v4 G DIR-615 $129.00 v4/v6 G/N DIR-815 $199.95 v4/v6 G/N
Interesting... In the US, it's more like: N-150 $35 v4/-- G DIR-615 $44 v4/v6 A/N(5) or B/G/N(2.4) DIR-815 $79 v4/v6 A/N(5) and B/G/N(2.4) The jump in price from the 615 to 815 is likely more related to the dual-radio vs. dual-band single radio. The jump between the N-150 and DIR-615 could be similarly attributed to the single-band radio vs. dual-band radio As such, it doesn't look like a huge jump in price for IPv6 to me. It looks comparable.
The IPv6 price point is still well above the IPv4 only price point.
1.00AUD = 1.06USD
Perhaps that's an accurate exchange rate, but, apparently there is a bigger difference in pricing than just the exchange point. Prices above obtained by google search a few minutes ago. Owen
In message <E9D05F4B-081C-4F5D-9C6F-05F4FF8F0B66@delong.com>, Owen DeLong writes:
On Jun 8, 2011, at 5:46 AM, Mark Andrews wrote:
=20 In message <B7872A58-DE28-4CC2-8929-931FD3CE019C@delong.com>, Owen = DeLong write s:
=3D20 In message =3D <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 = =3D users i=3D3D n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. =3D Unfortunat=3D3D ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only = =3D about 2-=3D3D 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just = =3D
lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I = =3D wonder =3D3D how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. =3D20 John =3D20 If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. =3D20 The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a = 10%
=20 On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: =20 people p=3D3D premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition. =20 I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days. =20 Owen =20 Wireless G Modem Router $79.00 v4 G N-150 $79.95 v4 G DIR-615 $129.00 v4/v6 G/N DIR-815 $199.95 v4/v6 G/N =20 Interesting... In the US, it's more like:
N-150 $35 v4/-- G DIR-615 $44 v4/v6 A/N(5) or B/G/N(2.4) DIR-815 $79 v4/v6 A/N(5) and B/G/N(2.4)
The jump in price from the 615 to 815 is likely more related to the dual-radio vs. dual-band single radio.
The jump between the N-150 and DIR-615 could be similarly attributed to the single-band radio vs. dual-band radio
As such, it doesn't look like a huge jump in price for IPv6 to me. It looks comparable.
The IPv6 price point is still well above the IPv4 only price point. =20 1.00AUD =3D 1.06USD
Perhaps that's an accurate exchange rate, but, apparently there is a bigger difference in pricing than just the exchange point. Prices above obtained by google search a few minutes ago.
The AUD prices include all taxes. That being said one can still buy retail in the states including taxes, add shipping and come out in front for a identical product. 3x markup is a rip-off.
Owen
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Mark Andrews wrote:
The AUD prices include all taxes. That being said one can still buy retail in the states including taxes, add shipping and come out in front for a identical product. 3x markup is a rip-off.
Swedish prices are approximately equivalent of 110USD for the 815, 60USD for the 615, that's including 25% VAT. Either you have high customs on these devices, or your retailer is ripping you off. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
The AUD prices include all taxes. That being said one can still buy retail in the states including taxes, add shipping and come out in front for a identical product. 3x markup is a rip-off.
No argument here, but, as I'm in the states... The worst tax rate I know in the US is California (where I live) at 9.25%, but, if you order on-line (at least for a few more weeks), there's usually no sales tax. (California thinks their legislature can somehow pass a law that will affect out-of-state retailers, but, I'm not sure how they hope to enforce it). Owen
Just FWIW: US, Amazon, Dlink, DIR615, $35.45 ... /TJ On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 08:46, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
In message <B7872A58-DE28-4CC2-8929-931FD3CE019C@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about 700 = users i=3D n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. = Unfortunat=3D ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only = about 2-=3D 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just =
lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I = wonder =3D how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. =20 John =20 If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. =20 The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a 10%
=20 In message = <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes: people p=3D premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition.
I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days.
Owen
Wireless G Modem Router $79.00 v4 G N-150 $79.95 v4 G DIR-615 $129.00 v4/v6 G/N DIR-815 $199.95 v4/v6 G/N
The IPv6 price point is still well above the IPv4 only price point.
1.00AUD = 1.06USD -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
You might want to consider 655 or 825 from Dlink and the Apple Airport Extreme and Time Capsule. We have had a pretty good experience with these models thus far. John ========================================= John Jason Brzozowski Comcast Cable e) mailto:john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com o) 609-377-6594 m) 484-962-0060 w) http://www.comcast6.net ========================================= On 6/8/11 9:07 AM, "TJ" <trejrco@gmail.com> wrote:
Just FWIW: US, Amazon, Dlink, DIR615, $35.45 ...
/TJ
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 08:46, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
In message <B7872A58-DE28-4CC2-8929-931FD3CE019C@delong.com>, Owen DeLong write s:
On Jun 7, 2011, at 9:15 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
=20 In message = <AF24AE2D4A4D334FB9B667985E2AE763A3AC06@mail1-sea.office.spectrumnet .us>, John van Oppen writes:
I was wondering the same thing... we have v6 enabled to about
700 =
n our native Ethernet to the home deployment here in Seattle. = Unfortunat=3D ely, user routers don't seem to often support v6 resulting in only = about 2-=3D 8% of users in most buildings using it, and most of those are just =
lugged directly into the wall jacks we provide without routers. I = wonder =3D how long it will take for everyone to upgrade their home routers. =20 John =20 If all the home CPE router vendors stopped shipping IPv4 only boxes, not that long. At the moment the price point for IPv6 CPE routers is still 2-3x the IPv4 only boxes when you can find one though not all of that difference is IPv6. The IPv6 boxes often have multiple radio and other extras. This shows that CPE vendors still see IPv6 as something *extra* and not something that should be *standard*. =20 The D-Link DIR series v6 capables are not actually more than about a 10%
users i=3D people p=3D premium over the corresponding ipv4-only competition.
I see them in computer stores fairly regularly these days.
Owen
Wireless G Modem Router $79.00 v4 G N-150 $79.95 v4 G DIR-615 $129.00 v4/v6 G/N DIR-815 $199.95 v4/v6 G/N
The IPv6 price point is still well above the IPv4 only price point.
1.00AUD = 1.06USD -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
www.juniper.net is on IPv6
www.facebook.com has AAAA but doesn't load for me over IPv6, it does for others though
Working great for me. Getting to it via HE.
www.level3.com works fine over v4 but shows a 404 over IPv6
Yes, I am seeing that too. Cute. michael
Some sites still require ipv4 to load properly (stylesheets, statics, etc) disable ipv4 on your machine and go to: http://www.facebook.com http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/ http://www.yahoo.com/ I guess it is a start though.
That is one of the issues that I believe RIPE is capturing -- how many dual-stacked sites have all their objects dual-stacked. Frank -----Original Message----- From: David Hill [mailto:dhill@mindcry.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 12:10 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 day fun is beginning! Some sites still require ipv4 to load properly (stylesheets, statics, etc) disable ipv4 on your machine and go to: http://www.facebook.com http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/ http://www.yahoo.com/ I guess it is a start though.
participants (43)
-
Blake T. Pfankuch -
Brzozowski, John -
cja＠daydream.com -
Daniel Roesen -
David Hill -
Diego Veca -
Frank Bulk -
fredrik danerklint -
George B. -
Graham Beneke -
Harry Hoffman -
Iljitsch van Beijnum -
Jack Bates -
Jamie Bowden -
Jared Mauch -
Jay Ashworth -
Jeroen Massar -
Joakim Aronius -
Joel Jaeggli -
John van Oppen -
John.Herbert＠usc-bt.com -
Joly MacFie -
Jorge Amodio -
Landon Stewart -
Mark Andrews -
Matt Ryanczak -
Michael Sinatra -
Mikael Abrahamsson -
Neil Long -
Owen DeLong -
Paul Graydon -
Pete Carah -
Randy Carpenter -
Ryan Pavely -
Rémy Sanchez -
Scott Howard -
Seth Mattinen -
Steven Bellovin -
Tim Chown -
TJ -
Tony Finch -
Victor Kuarsingh -
Williams, Marcus (Contractor)