North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Deploying IPv6 in a datacenter (Was: Awful quiet?)
On Dec 21, 2005, at 4:18 PM, Daniel Roesen wrote:
We had a case where a somewhat decent sized provider that was actually using IPv6 accidentally stopped announcing their space without realizing it. After a couple of days of waiting for them to fix it, I emailed their NOC and got the impression that I was the first to notice they had killed IPv6.That's certainly true for people not doing it "in production". But that1) IPv6 on the internet overall seems a bit unreliable at the moment. Entire /32's disappear and reappear, gone for days at a time.
I admit, my experiences are with only a tiny number of users, so I may have just had bad luck. But, I had trouble finding any of our IPv6 guinea pigs that didn't take a perceptibly slower route to us over 6 than they do for 4. (50-100ms)The most common path over IPv6 from the US to Europe is US->JP->US- >EU.Sorry, but that's not true anymore on grand scale. That might still be
Right now, I can't remember, this was a couple of months ago now... But next time I encounter one, I'll drop you an email.I realize this may be specific to our connection itself, but browsing looking glasses seems to back up that it's not just us.That'd suprise me. Could you give examples?
I don't doubt that there are better tools for IPv6 DNS, but we were already using djbdns for a couple of reasons and I didn't want to undergo a switch to something else JUST to add AAAA records when what we had was working well enough for us. I wasn't trying to document how to do IPv6 right, just what problems we hit when we tried to switch to IPv6 with no thought to IPv6 being done beforehand.5) Our DNS software(djbdns) supports IPv6, kind of. WIth patches you can enter AAAA records, but only by entering 32 digit hexadecimal numbers with no colons or abbreviations. We were never able to get it to respond to queries over IPv6, so of all our DNS is still IPv4.Then stop using incomplete and cumbersome software from authors with strong religious believes and a disconnection from any technological advances of the last $many years. :-) "Use the right tools for the job".
Our test network was running through a GRE tunnel inside an IPIP tunnel, so our MTU was abnormally tiny. I'm guessing that hit some people with PMTUD problems that didn't normally see them because they had a short MTU to start with.10) Smaller than normal MTUs seem much more common on IPv6, and it is exposing PMTUD breakage on a lot of people's networks.It is, but we have tracked down most of them... at least the ones we noticed. I don't experience PMTUD problems anymore since long... the last one is prolly over half a year ago. And I use IPv6 on all my servers, desktops and laptop. :-)
Out of all of our transit providers, only one could sell us IPv6 transit(not faulting those who don't yet). Out of 100+ peering connections, only 2 wanted to do IPv6 peering. So, I don't have many different angles to view things from.That is indeed a problem. How big the penalty is, depends heavily on11) Almost without fail, the path an IPv6 user takes to reach us (and vice-versa) is less optimal than the IPv4 route. Users are being penalized for turning on IPv6, since they have no way to fall back to IPv4 on a site-by-site basis when using a web browser.
That said though, the provider we are using for IPv6 seems to be doing it right, it just doesn't feel like IPv6 has the same "mesh" yet where who is connected to who doesn't really matter that much.
Thank you for sharing your experience!
We threw in the towel (pulled AAAA records) about 6 weeks ago, and started IPv6 experimentation about 16 weeks ago.
I'll be writing up a paper going into a lot more detail about what went right, what went wrong, and why the decision was made to revert back to IPv4 soon, if anyone is interested.