IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days
The IPv6 version of www.qwest.com has been down for 10 days. Wget shows a 301 to www.centurylink.com, but that also fails. Emails to the nocs at both companies have gone unanswered. Unless HE is deployed in a web browser, this behavior leads to a bad end-user experience. If anyone can prod either of these two companies that would be much appreciated. Frank nagios:/home/fbulk# wget -6 www.qwest.com --2011-08-18 00:32:40-- http://www.qwest.com/ Resolving www.qwest.com... 2001:428:b21:1::20 Connecting to www.qwest.com|2001:428:b21:1::20|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 301 Moved Permanently Location: http://www.centurylink.com/ [following] --2011-08-18 00:32:40-- http://www.centurylink.com/ Resolving www.centurylink.com... 2001:428:b21:1::22 Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:02-- (try: 2) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:25-- (try: 3) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:49-- (try: 4) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. Etc...
-----Original Message----- From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk@iname.com] Sent: 18 August 2011 06:36 To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days
The IPv6 version of www.qwest.com has been down for 10 days. Wget shows a 301 to www.centurylink.com, but that also fails. Emails to the nocs at both companies have gone unanswered. Unless HE is deployed in a web browser, this behavior leads to a bad end-user experience.
If anyone can prod either of these two companies that would be much appreciated.
Frank
It seems that any IPv6 efforts by organisations are best effort at most with of course some notable exceptions who seem to offer a really very good service (HE for example). It's starting to get to a point now, I think, that some end users have IPv6 (Andrews and Arnold have offered IPv6 for years) and issues such as these are just going to start to give IPv6 a bad name in the eyes of consumers. It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA records to break peoples connectivity to their resources. -- Leigh Porter ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________
Thus spake Leigh Porter (leigh.porter@ukbroadband.com) on Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 11:47:19AM +0000:
It seems that any IPv6 efforts by organisations are best effort at most with of course some notable exceptions who seem to offer a really very good service (HE for example). It's starting to get to a point now, I think, that some end users have IPv6 (Andrews and Arnold have offered IPv6 for years) and issues such as these are just going to start to give IPv6 a bad name in the eyes of consumers.
It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA records to break peoples connectivity to their resources.
This, as Frank points out is why getting Happy Eyeballs support into applications like web browsers is so important. I think modern versions of Chrome & Firefox do this. Safari does something similar, but arguably more naive. I don't know about IE. Dale
On Aug 18, 2011, at 4:47 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk@iname.com] Sent: 18 August 2011 06:36 To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days
The IPv6 version of www.qwest.com has been down for 10 days. Wget shows a 301 to www.centurylink.com, but that also fails. Emails to the nocs at both companies have gone unanswered. Unless HE is deployed in a web browser, this behavior leads to a bad end-user experience.
If anyone can prod either of these two companies that would be much appreciated.
Frank
It seems that any IPv6 efforts by organisations are best effort at most with of course some notable exceptions who seem to offer a really very good service (HE for example). It's starting to get to a point now, I think, that some end users have IPv6 (Andrews and Arnold have offered IPv6 for years) and issues such as these are just going to start to give IPv6 a bad name in the eyes of consumers.
It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA records to break peoples connectivity to their resources.
+1 -- I'm all for publishing AAAA records as everyone knows, but, if you publish AAAA records for a consumer facing service, please support and monitor that service with a similar level to what you do for your IPv4 versions of the service. The coming years are going to be difficult enough for end-users without adding unnecessary anti-IPv6 sentiments to the mix. Owen
On 19/08/2011, at 4:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA records to break peoples connectivity to their resources. +1 -- I'm all for publishing AAAA records as everyone knows, but, if you publish AAAA records for a consumer facing service, please support and monitor that service with a similar level to what you do for your IPv4 versions of the service. The coming years are going to be difficult enough for end-users without adding unnecessary anti-IPv6 sentiments to the mix. Owen +1 to Owen's comment. I'd also add some more comments: A lot of eyeballs that have v6 right now are the people with a lot of clue. Do you want these people, who'll often be buying or recommending your services to rate your ability to deliver as a fail? Our experience with IPv6 consumer broadband has been that the early adopters are the people who, well, goto IETF meetings, follow standards and ask the bloody hard questions. Even given the Happy Eyeballs (Did Hurricane PAY for it to be abbrievated as HE?? :-) ) most end users prefer IPv6 over IPv4. Deeply this means there is a tendency for v6 traffic to grow and be more important to connectivity than you may imagine. The tipping point for IPv6 traffic being dominant I suspect is going to be a lower threshold of take up than people might expect. Consider this when thinking about the level of thought you give to IPv6 infrastructure and PPS rates. MMC
FYI, the issue is not resolved and I've not heard from either of the companies suggesting that they're working on it. Note their commitment to IPv6 in these releases: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/centurylink-joins-internet-community -in-world-ipv6-day-123089908.html http://news.centurylink.com/index.php?s=43&item=2129 Frank -----Original Message----- From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:mmc@internode.com.au] Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 7:08 PM To: Owen DeLong Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days On 19/08/2011, at 4:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6 connectivity because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA records to break peoples connectivity to their resources. +1 -- I'm all for publishing AAAA records as everyone knows, but, if you publish AAAA records for a consumer facing service, please support and monitor that service with a similar level to what you do for your IPv4 versions of the service. The coming years are going to be difficult enough for end-users without adding unnecessary anti-IPv6 sentiments to the mix. Owen +1 to Owen's comment. I'd also add some more comments: A lot of eyeballs that have v6 right now are the people with a lot of clue. Do you want these people, who'll often be buying or recommending your services to rate your ability to deliver as a fail? Our experience with IPv6 consumer broadband has been that the early adopters are the people who, well, goto IETF meetings, follow standards and ask the bloody hard questions. Even given the Happy Eyeballs (Did Hurricane PAY for it to be abbrievated as HE?? :-) ) most end users prefer IPv6 over IPv4. Deeply this means there is a tendency for v6 traffic to grow and be more important to connectivity than you may imagine. The tipping point for IPv6 traffic being dominant I suspect is going to be a lower threshold of take up than people might expect. Consider this when thinking about the level of thought you give to IPv6 infrastructure and PPS rates. MMC
Good news: access to the v6 version of www.qwest.com came up at 12:30 pm today -- it redirects to www.centurylink.com, but at least it's working. Only www.savvis.com remains in my list of service provider websites that have non-working IPv6. Frank -----Original Message----- From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk@iname.com] Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 12:35 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days The IPv6 version of www.qwest.com has been down for 10 days. Wget shows a 301 to www.centurylink.com, but that also fails. Emails to the nocs at both companies have gone unanswered. Unless HE is deployed in a web browser, this behavior leads to a bad end-user experience. If anyone can prod either of these two companies that would be much appreciated. Frank nagios:/home/fbulk# wget -6 www.qwest.com --2011-08-18 00:32:40-- http://www.qwest.com/ Resolving www.qwest.com... 2001:428:b21:1::20 Connecting to www.qwest.com|2001:428:b21:1::20|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 301 Moved Permanently Location: http://www.centurylink.com/ [following] --2011-08-18 00:32:40-- http://www.centurylink.com/ Resolving www.centurylink.com... 2001:428:b21:1::22 Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:02-- (try: 2) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:25-- (try: 3) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. --2011-08-18 00:33:49-- (try: 4) http://www.centurylink.com/ Connecting to www.centurylink.com|2001:428:b21:1::22|:80... failed: Connection timed out. Retrying. Etc...
participants (5)
-
Dale W. Carder -
Frank Bulk -
Leigh Porter -
Matthew Moyle-Croft -
Owen DeLong