On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:28, 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.
agreed, but still better than juniper.net at the moment, glue seems to
be completely g
6:10 AM
To: nanog
Subject: Re: AAAA on various websites, but they all forgot to enable them on
their nameservers
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:28, 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
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
;; fl
> 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-
> 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_files/diagn
>>> 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
>
> g
-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
> ...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
J
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 a
On Wed, 08 Jun 2011 02:28:40 -0700, 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
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 namese
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
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 th
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
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 mus
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, sadl
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
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
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
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 that ~40 of their customers would
22 matches
Mail list logo
