nanog mailing list archives
Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted
From: Nathan Ward <nanog () daork net>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 12:32:48 +1200
On 30/05/2007, at 11:33 AM, Perry Lorier wrote:
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:This is useless. Users need to use the same name for both IPv4 and IPv6,they should not notice it.And if there are issues (my experience is not that one), we need to know them ASAP. Any transition means some pain, but as sooner as we start, soonerwe can sort it out, if required.In the past we've used "www6" for v6 only, "www4" for v4 only, and "www" has both v6 and v4. This means people can verify their v6 connectivity by visiting www6, or they can avoid v6 if they have local problems by using www4 (since the site contains information on setting up/troubleshooting v6 it's possible they can't get to it via v6), but if they don't know/care they end up on "www" which gives them whatever their software thinks it can support.
Which works fine for you and me, but not for my mother.Another suggestion I have heard is having www A-only, and www6 AAAA- only, and transparently redirecting if they have IPv6 connectivity. Of course, that requires an IPv4 bootstrap, so is rather pointless.
-- Nathan Ward
Current thread:
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted, (continued)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- Re: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Iljitsch van Beijnum (May 30)
- 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Jeroen Massar (May 30)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Mike Leber (May 30)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) Mike Leber (May 30)
- RE: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) James Jun (May 30)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) virendra rode // (May 30)
- Re: 6bone space used still in the free (www.ietf.org over IPv6 broken) (Was: why same names, was Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted) bmanning (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Perry Lorier (May 29)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Nathan Ward (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted michael.dillon (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted John Curran (May 29)
- RE: NANOG 40 agenda posted Tony Hain (May 30)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Randy Bush (May 30)
- dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Patrick W. Gilmore (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Donald Stahl (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] Merike Kaeo (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack [was: NANOG 40 agenda posted] JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (May 30)
- Re: dual-stack simon (May 31)
- Re: NANOG 40 agenda posted Jared Mauch (May 30)