North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: IPv6 Connectivity Saga (part n+1)

  • From: Christopher Morrow
  • Date: Sat Feb 02 23:18:06 2008
  • Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; bh=a4EJW1gsJFqiKNr9r1neQdICYsgb76nuV6PUmmLjD5k=; b=aM6rQX3eIpnNAjz9Kgd79Crvt9flk+sry4vdVME7lPzUjZlxySTtMgWS+NW5++seZvprd9RoGNSDzacm9FJePfSnK3j2oixWnWqPI1yxTMOMc6CfMqiQh/kx89LQTNGfgZ5n1TyurCV9acgVHXmpWMvDNADiDV4Ih+0/QcHn3sw=
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=nPA4nYb7E241Wuo5+UidaeS++w3SOiVZUM9qXaQXGRxFIMy9/aIY67cWv29MTg5/PmfYs9hwvtXBU/pXNzUGBkoTCi9WlVhDymbzEy1xzM+rdDa5O8qujUtXKNFC07cJ7C289mEpOnMbLjL0qJZ3Hf7PsPlnvJr9/o77CC0IeYE=

On Feb 2, 2008 6:24 PM, Thomas Kühne <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Another factor is that with IPv4, you need to be pragmatic, because if
> > you don't, you have no connectivity. With IPv6, you can impose
> > arbitrary restrictions as much as you want, because IPv4 makes sure
> > there is always fallback connectivity anyway.
> Maybe, but the most frequently encountered errors were time outs and
> those usually degrade performance drastically.

one might also consider that there may not be v4 conectivity in all
cases, so if you offer up a AAAA please make sure the services on the
relevant AAAA/A are consistent/available.