They could do 6rd by just flipping a switch on one of their routers.
Granted it is not native IPv6 but maybe better than nothing.
Regards
Baldur
so… bring your own avian carriers?
manning
bmann...@karoshi.com
PO Box 12317
Marina del Rey, CA 90295
310.322.8102
On 29May2015Friday, at 19:49, Randy Bush wrote:
> ryuu.psg.com:/Users/randy> ping rsync.tools.ietf.org
> PING zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (64.170.98.42): 56 data bytes
> 64 bytes f
On May 27, 2015, at 1:59 AM, Tony Hain wrote:
> David,
>
> While I agree with you that there is no excuse for the general IPv6
> brokenness across all vendors, they are just doing what participants on lists
> like this one tell them. Name&Shame may help a little, but until a large
> number o
On Tue, 2015-05-26 at 23:59 -0700, Tony Hain wrote:
> (...) For fun, project this
> http://www.google.com/intl/en/ipv6/statistics.html
> (...)
Hi,
If someone from google is listening it would be really nice to
spend a few minutes t oavoid flash for displaying this graph, it doesn't
work on my G
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:45 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> On May 29, 2015, at 6:14 PM, Christopher Morrow
>> wrote:
>>
>> i love that you are always combative, it makes for great tv.
>>
>> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>>
On May 29, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Christopher Morro
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Andras Toth wrote:
> Perhaps if that energy which was spent on raging, instead was spent on
> a Google search, then all those words would've been unnecessary.
>
> As it turns out that IPv6 is already available on ELBs since 2011:
> https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws
while /bin/true; do rsync-vaHx --delete rsync.tools.ietf.org::xml2rfc .; done
go to sleep, most likely it'll be done in the morning?
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 7:21 AM, manning wrote:
> so… bring your own avian carriers?
>
>
> manning
> bmann...@karoshi.com
> PO Box 12317
> Marina del Rey, CA 90295
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/578850
I would get a kick out of it if folk here tried this new speedtest
periodically (on the "cable" setting) during the nanog conference. ;)
There is a hires option for more detail on the resulting charts...
(or fiddled with "flent" (flent.org))
--
Dave Tä
> only a 1.5 seconds of bufferbloat. Mind If I repost that result?
> (would prefer you did to this list)
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/578850
>
>
> Amazon doesn't even offer a v4/v6 LoadBalancer service right? (I had
> thought they did, but I guess I'm mis-remembering)
They sort of do, but it’s utterly incompatible with all of their modern
capabilities. You have to use some pretty antiquated VM provisioning and such
to use it if I u
Only EC2 classic has dual stack anything. VPC load balancers (and, indeed,
everything about VPC) is IPv4 only.
And EC2 classic is being phased out, so dualstack is sort of dying on AWS.
However, I do have some solid information that they're scrambling to
retrofit, but seeing
as how we know AWS op
Oh, and the only thing dual stack about EC2 Classic was ELBs (elastic load
balancers). Instances had no means of IPv6 communication except via an
ELB. That
is the FULL extent of IPv6 implementation on AWS at present...and most
people do not have EC2 classic.
On Sat, May 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Blai
> On May 30, 2015, at 8:38 AM, Andras Toth wrote:
>
> Perhaps if that energy which was spent on raging, instead was spent on
> a Google search, then all those words would've been unnecessary.
>
> As it turns out that IPv6 is already available on ELBs since 2011:
> https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/a
There's a corollary of the bufferbloat phenomenon: buffer drain time. It's not
the size of the buffer, but how long it takes to empty. And US ISPs continue to
say "customers don't want upload speed".
If the ISP upload speed was symmetric you'd likely never notice the 1-2MB of
buffers.
I guess w
While I agree that upload speeds aren't great, it doesn't mean that the
buffers aren't big. Buffer sizes of the order of MB's are uncalled for
at the edge, unless we're talking really high speeds. The miniscule
performance increase for single TCP flows doesn't really justify the
potential incre
Hi,
We are an enterprise that are eBGP multihoming to two ISPs. We wish to load
balance in inbound and outbound traffic thereby using our capacity as
efficiently as possible. My current feeling is that it would be crazy for us to
take a full Internet routing table from either ISP. I have read
Perhaps if that energy which was spent on raging, instead was spent on
a Google search, then all those words would've been unnecessary.
As it turns out that IPv6 is already available on ELBs since 2011:
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/elastic-load-balancing-ipv6-zone-apex-support-additional-secur
17 matches
Mail list logo
