Anyone have a contact at www.rt.com that can encourage them to to delete their bad aaaa ? Some users on some devices fail to reach www.rt.com due to this dns failure. I know about various work arounds, looking for RT.com to fix this by deleting the bad aaaa record. Shared from ISC Dig for iOS ; <<>> DiG 9.10.4 <<>> @fe80::4c60:deff:fee6:b019 @192.168.1.1 www.rt.com aaaa +sit +dnssec +noqr +multiline ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4367 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1 ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags: do; udp: 512 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.rt.com. IN AAAA ;; ANSWER SECTION: www.rt.com. 10 IN AAAA ::ffff:37.48.108.112 ;; Query time: 298 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.1.1#53(192.168.1.1) ;; WHEN: Wed Jul 06 20:19:34 PDT 2016 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 67
Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation http://[::ffff:37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers. *Spencer Ryan* | Senior Systems Administrator | sryan@arbor.net *Arbor Networks* +1.734.794.5033 (d) | +1.734.846.2053 (m) www.arbornetworks.com On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
Anyone have a contact at www.rt.com that can encourage them to to delete their bad aaaa ?
Some users on some devices fail to reach www.rt.com due to this dns failure. I know about various work arounds, looking for RT.com to fix this by deleting the bad aaaa record.
Shared from ISC Dig for iOS
; <<>> DiG 9.10.4 <<>> @fe80::4c60:deff:fee6:b019 @192.168.1.1 www.rt.com aaaa +sit +dnssec +noqr +multiline ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4367 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags: do; udp: 512 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.rt.com. IN AAAA
;; ANSWER SECTION: www.rt.com. 10 IN AAAA ::ffff:37.48.108.112
;; Query time: 298 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.1.1#53(192.168.1.1) ;; WHEN: Wed Jul 06 20:19:34 PDT 2016 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 67
On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net> wrote:
Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation
http://[::ffff:37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers.
Spencer,
It may be legit on your network, but people generally don't do that.... If they publish a aaaa record, it usually has a legit v6 address in it. That said, what they have done breaks in dns64 networks. This could be a real downer for them in the near future if they dont remove this aaaa. I am sending this mail in attempt to head of impending disruptions for www.rt.com for some subset of users. And www.rt.com is one of only two sites in the alexa top 25,000 websites to do this thing. http://www.employees.org/~dwing/aaaa-stats/ipv6-map.2016-07-07_0800.txt So, again, it would be great if www.rt.com could remove the aaaa. CB
*Spencer Ryan* | Senior Systems Administrator | sryan@arbor.net <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','sryan@arbor.net');> *Arbor Networks* +1.734.794.5033 (d) | +1.734.846.2053 (m) www.arbornetworks.com
On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 7:25 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','cb.list6@gmail.com');>> wrote:
Anyone have a contact at www.rt.com that can encourage them to to delete their bad aaaa ?
Some users on some devices fail to reach www.rt.com due to this dns failure. I know about various work arounds, looking for RT.com to fix this by deleting the bad aaaa record.
Shared from ISC Dig for iOS
; <<>> DiG 9.10.4 <<>> @fe80::4c60:deff:fee6:b019 @192.168.1.1 www.rt.com aaaa +sit +dnssec +noqr +multiline ; (1 server found) ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 4367 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION: ; EDNS: version: 0, flags: do; udp: 512 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;www.rt.com. IN AAAA
;; ANSWER SECTION: www.rt.com. 10 IN AAAA ::ffff:37.48.108.112
;; Query time: 298 msec ;; SERVER: 192.168.1.1#53(192.168.1.1) ;; WHEN: Wed Jul 06 20:19:34 PDT 2016 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 67
Does not work for on iOS
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:36:23PM -0700, Ca By wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net> wrote:
Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation
http://[::ffff:37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers.
It may be legit on your network, but people generally don't do that.... If they publish a aaaa record, it usually has a legit v6 address in it.
That is a legit IPv6 address. That it won't work on a host that is IPv6-only is a different issue, and one I agree is probably an unexpected and unwanted side effect. - Matt
The new undersea cable systems are now capable of 18 terabits per fiber pair. It is interesting how combinations of bits are being represented by combinations of optical features. http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-5/features/whi... Roderick Beck Director of Global Sales United Cable Company www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com>
Essentially the transceiver optics are applying the same modulation and coding that have been used in point-to-point microwave for a long time... Starting from OOK, up to BPSK and then on to QPSK, 16QAM and possibly 64QAM with varying levels of FEC. A singlemode fiber is just an extremely narrow diameter waveguide. Big difference in frequency between a 71-86 GHz FDD radio pair and optical at 191 to 196 THz. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com> wrote:
The new undersea cable systems are now capable of 18 terabits per fiber pair. It is interesting how combinations of bits are being represented by combinations of optical features.
http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-5/features/whi...
Roderick Beck
Director of Global Sales
United Cable Company
www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com>
Apparently 40 gigs is the limit of simple laser flash equals 1, no flash equals 0. Above that threshold the signal becomes larger than an ITU 50 gigahertz channel. Most new undersea cables are using QPSK or 8 QAM and talking about 16 QAM. This companion piece explains it: http://digital.lightwaveonline.com/lightwave/20130708/?pm=1&u1=friend&pg=19#pg19. - Roderick. ________________________________ From: Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 10:40 PM To: Rod Beck Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Interesting Article on Modulation Schemes Essentially the transceiver optics are applying the same modulation and coding that have been used in point-to-point microwave for a long time... Starting from OOK, up to BPSK and then on to QPSK, 16QAM and possibly 64QAM with varying levels of FEC. A singlemode fiber is just an extremely narrow diameter waveguide. Big difference in frequency between a 71-86 GHz FDD radio pair and optical at 191 to 196 THz. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com<mailto:rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com>> wrote: The new undersea cable systems are now capable of 18 terabits per fiber pair. It is interesting how combinations of bits are being represented by combinations of optical features. http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-5/features/whi... Roderick Beck Director of Global Sales United Cable Company www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com><http://www.unitedcablecompany.com>
Not just "talking about" 16QAM is in active use for subsea high capacity channels... Both Xtera and Infinera are shipping DWDM terminals for installation at cable landing stations that use 16QAM for 100/200/400 Gbps superchannels. http://www.xtera.com/home/technology/100g-and-400g/ http://www.xtera.com/home/products/nu-wave-optima/ Unless I'm grossly mistaken, Alcatel-Lucent and Huawei as well. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com> wrote:
Apparently 40 gigs is the limit of simple laser flash equals 1, no flash equals 0. Above that threshold the signal becomes larger than an ITU 50 gigahertz channel. Most new undersea cables are using QPSK or 8 QAM and talking about 16 QAM.
This companion piece explains it: http://digital.lightwaveonline.com/lightwave/20130708/?pm=1&u1=friend&pg=19#pg19 .
- Roderick.
------------------------------ *From:* Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, July 8, 2016 10:40 PM *To:* Rod Beck *Cc:* nanog@nanog.org *Subject:* Re: Interesting Article on Modulation Schemes
Essentially the transceiver optics are applying the same modulation and coding that have been used in point-to-point microwave for a long time... Starting from OOK, up to BPSK and then on to QPSK, 16QAM and possibly 64QAM with varying levels of FEC.
A singlemode fiber is just an extremely narrow diameter waveguide. Big difference in frequency between a 71-86 GHz FDD radio pair and optical at 191 to 196 THz.
On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com> wrote:
The new undersea cable systems are now capable of 18 terabits per fiber pair. It is interesting how combinations of bits are being represented by combinations of optical features.
http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-5/features/whi...
Roderick Beck
Director of Global Sales
United Cable Company
www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com>
I don't see wide spread deployment. The most recently built TransAtlantic cable is Aquacomms It is QPSK and 130 100 gig waves per pair. Does one really need more? C-Lion, the new Finland/Germany cable is 18 terabits per fiber pair. I think that is 8 QAM. Is that a representative sample? I don't know. It is certainly a small sample and hence could be highly contained by random error. Since so many ISPs dropped their Layer 2 networks in favor of buying cheap transit, the market for 100 gig waves is limited to Tier 1 ISPs, a few huge hosting companies, and the public Web giants in shopping, social media. I have been told that the video streaming guys like Netflix are more similar to Akamai than Telia. Dense local footprints. Bottom line. I don't think the demand is sufficient or the interface costs on the customer side sufficiently low. Could be wrong about both. Regards, Roderick. ________________________________ From: Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 11:45 PM To: Rod Beck Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Interesting Article on Modulation Schemes Not just "talking about" 16QAM is in active use for subsea high capacity channels... Both Xtera and Infinera are shipping DWDM terminals for installation at cable landing stations that use 16QAM for 100/200/400 Gbps superchannels. http://www.xtera.com/home/technology/100g-and-400g/ 100G and 400G Coherent | Xtera<http://www.xtera.com/home/technology/100g-and-400g/> www.xtera.com Xtera's coherent technology support 100G, 400G and beyond optical channel rates for high-capacity backbone networks. http://www.xtera.com/home/products/nu-wave-optima/ Unless I'm grossly mistaken, Alcatel-Lucent and Huawei as well. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com<mailto:rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com>> wrote: Apparently 40 gigs is the limit of simple laser flash equals 1, no flash equals 0. Above that threshold the signal becomes larger than an ITU 50 gigahertz channel. Most new undersea cables are using QPSK or 8 QAM and talking about 16 QAM. This companion piece explains it: http://digital.lightwaveonline.com/lightwave/20130708/?pm=1&u1=friend&pg=19#pg19. - Roderick. ________________________________ From: Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke@gmail.com<mailto:eric.kuhnke@gmail.com>> Sent: Friday, July 8, 2016 10:40 PM To: Rod Beck Cc: nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Interesting Article on Modulation Schemes Essentially the transceiver optics are applying the same modulation and coding that have been used in point-to-point microwave for a long time... Starting from OOK, up to BPSK and then on to QPSK, 16QAM and possibly 64QAM with varying levels of FEC. A singlemode fiber is just an extremely narrow diameter waveguide. Big difference in frequency between a 71-86 GHz FDD radio pair and optical at 191 to 196 THz. On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 1:50 AM, Rod Beck <rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com<mailto:rod.beck@unitedcablecompany.com>> wrote: The new undersea cable systems are now capable of 18 terabits per fiber pair. It is interesting how combinations of bits are being represented by combinations of optical features. http://www.lightwaveonline.com/articles/print/volume-30/issue-5/features/whi... Roderick Beck Director of Global Sales United Cable Company www.unitedcablecompany.com<http://www.unitedcablecompany.com><http://www.unitedcablecompany.com>
On 2016-07-08 04:33, Matt Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:36:23PM -0700, Ca By wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net> wrote:
Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation
http://[::ffff:37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers. It may be legit on your network, but people generally don't do that.... If they publish a aaaa record, it usually has a legit v6 address in it. That is a legit IPv6 address.
No it is not. It is a format intended to be used only within a process to store IPv4 addresses in a single common data structure for IPv4/IPv6 or for use in a socket API so a combined IPv4/IPv6 interface can be provided. There is no requirement that other processes understand it. There is no requirement that IPv4-mapped addressing is not disabled on a system supporting IPv6 (RFC4291 section 8 security considerations). From RFC5156: 2.2 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5156#section-2.2>. IPv4-Mapped Addresses ::FFFF:0:0/96 are the IPv4-mapped addresses [RFC4291 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291>]. Addresses within this block should not appear on the public Internet. You can put it in a AAAA record just as you can configure a 10.0.0.0/8 address there, but there can be no expectation that it will do anything useful outside your own environment. Regards, Baldur
Matt Palmer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 06:36:23PM -0700, Ca By wrote:
On Thursday, July 7, 2016, Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net> wrote:
Dotted-quad notation is completely valid, and works fine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_address#Presentation
http://[::ffff:37.48.108.112] loads fine in my browsers.
It may be legit on your network, but people generally don't do that.... If they publish a aaaa record, it usually has a legit v6 address in it.
That is a legit IPv6 address. That it won't work on a host that is IPv6-only is a different issue, and one I agree is probably an unexpected and unwanted side effect.
This doesn't sound like a host issue, but a broken dns64 implementation. If it checked the content of the aaaa response for an ::ffff... answer and treated that as an A-only response, the host would never be involved. Tony
participants (7)
-
Baldur Norddahl -
Ca By -
Eric Kuhnke -
Matt Palmer -
Rod Beck -
Spencer Ryan -
Tony Hain