North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?

  • From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
  • Date: Mon Sep 24 06:51:50 2007
  • Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=consulintel.es; s=MDaemon; t=1190630183; x=1191234983; [email protected]; q=dns; h=DomainKey-Signature:Received:User-Agent:Date:Subject:From:To: Message-ID:Thread-Topic:Thread-Index:In-Reply-To:Mime-version: Content-type:Content-transfer-encoding:Reply-To; b=pbGJiU21OJGxMO 7FCnze8QH8hKeWTHPIY1QVwLW+Ae2u4jhkLfC868eFzJGEQ1h7e274mJE7aQHhAS Z4wLF2zlww6zuh9lLZ0CLhTdhWhN/WtlJjI8uwae711+6PNYn/9ejK3p6FmVi2P/ rMApnT0HxrEyVSWR8YJIJW0fo6KiQ=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=MDaemon; d=consulintel.es; c=simple; q=dns; h=from:message-id; b=AGMjrctBZdLQCuQc3rS10wclr4iNR+J8y4wCyo5+WZWe1jZttPuUcKpZxTXecMMBMuXnJ+EqVP/StGx50fGeff+P4YrBWilKMbTZ9UM24KrFfQn99N08XRaRBWCm9OVxYhSZ8QofxGIjpYd7cWlK5IYP6zyNWj3ffwzzqv0whCA=;
For a production service, I will never use dual naming for IPv4 and IPv6, is
ridiculous ask the users to understand if they want to use one or the other
to use a different name. For a testing, not an issue.

Regards,
Jordi




> De: Martin Hannigan <[email protected]>
> Responder a: <[email protected]>
> Fecha: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:06:25 -0400
> Para: Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email protected]>
> CC: Barrett Lyon <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
> Asunto: Re: Apple Airport Extreme IPv6 problems?
> 
> 
> On 9/15/07, Iljitsch van Beijnum <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 15-sep-2007, at 21:25, Barrett Lyon wrote:
>> 
>>> The other thought that occurred to me, does FF/Safari/IE have any
>>> ability to default back to v4 if v6 is not working or behaving
>>> badly?  This could be a helpful transition feature but may be more
>>> trouble than it's worth.
>> 
>> Browsers are pretty good at falling back on a different address in
>> general / IPv4 in particular when the initial try doesn't work, but
>> it does take too long if the packet is silently dropped somewhere. If
>> there is an ICMP unreachable there is no real delay. Worst case is a
>> path MTU discovery black hole, then browsers generally don't fall back.
> 
> Getting back to my original discussion with Barrett, what should we do
> about naming? I initially though that segregating v6 in a subdomain
> was a good idea, but if this is truly a migration, v4 should be the
> interface segregated.
> 
>  I have also read Jordi? saying that no dual naming should occur, but
> I think this is unrealistic. (Sorry if I misquoted you, Jordi)
> 
>> It would be good if more ISPs deployed 6to4 gateways so the 6to4
>> experience would be better.
> 
> We are. There are an unending supply of small details that are in the
> way at the moment. :-)
> 
> Best,
> 
> Marty




**********************************************
The IPv6 Portal: http://www.ipv6tf.org

Bye 6Bone. Hi, IPv6 !
http://www.ipv6day.org

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.