Re: really facebook?

[David Swafford <david () davidswafford com>]

"This can't mean that all of their v6 traffic is backhauled to NJ, right?"
Nah, that would be really lame for performance -- I'm pretty sure they
treat V4/V6 equally :-D.

david.

On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:29 PM, mike <mike () mtcc com> wrote:
> On 12/27/12 9:25 AM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> > On 12/27/12 9:04 AM, mike wrote:
> > > I reloaded their app (yes, I know... sew me) and got this warning:
> > >
> > > IP address:     2600:100f:b119:c6bc:bd6f:fabb:ff30:2a3d
> > > Estimated location:     Livingston, NJ, US
> >
> > That's a rather good estimation of where many verizon wireless customers
> > appear to come from.
>
>
> This can't mean that all of their v6 traffic is backhauled to NJ, right?
>
>
> > > Which seems pretty bizarre. I'm guessing they must be getting it from
> > > whois or something based on the address block for Verizon. The reverse
> > > map according to
> > >
> > > host 2600:100f:b119:c6bc:bd6f:fabb:ff30:2a3d
> >
> > one assumes they have a an geoip database like they have for ipv4
> > > comes back with NXDOMAIN. I suppose the real issue here is with Vz
> > > and why they don't have v6 reverse maps, but it did throw me thinking
> > > that
> > > somebody in New Jersey might have hacked my account.
> >
> > Well could certainly wildcard their responses, not sure that dynamic dns
> > updates would be either scalable or appropiate.
>
>
> Right, brain fart on my part. Reverse map has nothing to do with a geoip
> database.
> It's still strange that it has no reverse map though. I wonder what might
> break because
> of that assumption :)
>
> Mike
> > > Mike