On Jun 15, 2011, at 12:32 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Seth Mattinen wrote:
listen-on-v6 { any; };
Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name companies
messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep thinking I must
have missed something. Because
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 12:15, Schiller, Heather A
heather.schil...@verizonbusiness.com wrote:
...yes, there is a serious lack of v6 enabled eyeballs. But it's also
not clear to me from Akamai's stats just how many of the sites they host
are v6 enabled. 2? 12? 500?
I remember it being stated
Octavio Alvarez wrote:
In fact. Although a website of mine worked flawlessly in a dual-stack
but it did NOT in an IPv6-only environment. Unfortunately, the problem
has to be fixed in the DNS provider, which though supporting
records was enough to support IPv6.
Why not run your own
On 6/15/2011 12:14, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Octavio Alvarez wrote:
In fact. Although a website of mine worked flawlessly in a dual-stack
but it did NOT in an IPv6-only environment. Unfortunately, the problem
has to be fixed in the DNS provider, which though supporting
records was enough
Seth Mattinen wrote:
listen-on-v6 { any; };
Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
thinking I must have missed something. Because surely those big
companies can't find it that difficult, can
On 6/15/2011 12:32, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Seth Mattinen wrote:
listen-on-v6 { any; };
Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
thinking I must have missed something. Because surely those big
In a message written on Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 12:32:09PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart
wrote:
Seth Mattinen wrote:
listen-on-v6 { any; };
Yeah that's what I did. But I keep reading about how these big name
companies messed it up in some subtle or not so subtle way and I keep
thinking I must have
Leo Bicknell wrote:
but it all doesn't matter because the network team hadn't actually
made IPv6 work yet as there was no business case.
Ahhh, ok, well at least I know I did it right the first time.
No, I'm not cynical. :)
It probably reflects daily practice for many big organisations,
In message 4df91ab3.6020...@mompl.net, Jeroen van Aart writes:
Leo Bicknell wrote:
but it all doesn't matter because the network team hadn't actually
made IPv6 work yet as there was no business case.
Ahhh, ok, well at least I know I did it right the first time.
No, I'm not cynical. :)
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 08:05:14AM +1000, Mark Andrews wrote:
You tell named to listen on IPv6 (listen-on-v6). It already uses IPv6
to make queries unless you turned it off on the command line with named -4.
To go IPv6 only on a dual stack machine use named -6.
You add records to the
It is really nice that folks where able to put records on their
websites for only 24 hours, but they forgot to put in the glue on their
nameservers.
As such, for the folks testing IPv6-only, a lot of sites will fail
unless they use a recursor that does the IPv4 for them.
The root is there,
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:28, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote:
It is really nice that folks where able to put records on their
websites for only 24 hours, but they forgot to put in the glue on their
nameservers.
agreed, but still better than juniper.net at the moment, glue seems to
Ah...I saw the same thing at 6:01 Central. Lost DNS resolution of
ipv6.juniper.net, and couldn't get A or NS records of juniper.net. Had to
flush the cache on my DNS servers.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Verlouw [mailto:dan...@shunoshu.net]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 6:10
Hi.
The main objective for today is to access the web services, that's why you
can't reach a record for a DNS query for a given NS server.
; DiG 9.5.1-P3 www.google.com
;; global options: printcmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 40029
;; flags: qr rd
The main objective for today is to access the web services, that's why you
can't reach a record for a DNS query for a given NS server.
So if there are no records from where we ftp6 the HOSTSV6.TXT file ?
-J
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Daniel Espejel wrote:
Hi.
The main objective for today is to access the web services, that's why you
can't reach a record for a DNS query for a given NS server.
exactly - this site provides a nice service snapshot:
http://www.mrp.net/IPv6Day.html
; DiG 9.5.1-P3
http://www.mrp.net/IPv6Day.html
The web access column reflects access to internal content or just the
home page ?
-J
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Jorge Amodio wrote:
http://www.mrp.net/IPv6Day.html
The web access column reflects access to internal content or just the
home page ?
Mark's notes explain what he tested and clicking on any link shows
the result of his diagnostics:
http://www.mrp.net/IPv6Day.html
The web access column reflects access to internal content or just the
home page ?
Mark's notes explain what he tested and clicking on any link shows
the result of his diagnostics:
http://www.mrp.net//IPv6Day_files/diagnostics/aol.com.html
guessing he
You shouldn't. The matter of the fact is that for al leats 24 hours users
like you and me ... all we can reach the main Webpages for each participant
in the ipv6 day.
The idea is that this must be all in a transparent manner for the final
users. If you have an IPv6 supported
-Original Message-
From: Jorge Amodio [mailto:jmamo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2011 1:01 PM
To: Lucy Lynch
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: on various websites, but they all forgot to enable
them on their nameservers
http://www.mrp.net/IPv6Day.html
The web
...yes, there is a serious lack of v6 enabled eyeballs. But it's also
not clear to me from Akamai's stats just how many of the sites they host
are v6 enabled. 2? 12? 500?
True. I'll go back to their site and dig for more detailed info about
what those hits are actually hitting.
Regards
Jorge
On Wed, 8 Jun 2011, Jeroen Massar wrote:
:: It is really nice that folks where able to put records on their
:: websites for only 24 hours, but they forgot to put in the glue on their
:: nameservers.
::
:: As such, for the folks testing IPv6-only, a lot of sites will fail
:: unless they use
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 02:28:40 -0700, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote:
It is really nice that folks where able to put records on their
websites for only 24 hours, but they forgot to put in the glue on their
nameservers.
As such, for the folks testing IPv6-only, a lot of sites will fail
24 matches
Mail list logo
