[139183] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 SEO implecations?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fred Baker)
Tue Mar 29 01:41:44 2011
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2C5B138E-480E-4B3A-A5A8-7715625B459B@bsdboy.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:40:27 +0200
To: Wil Schultz <wschultz@bsdboy.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org Group" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 29, 2011, at 1:21 AM, Wil Schultz wrote:
> So far the consensus is to run dual stack natively.
>=20
> While this definitely is the way things should be set up in the end, I =
can see some valid reasons to run ipv4 and ipv6 on separate domains for =
a while before final configuration. For example, if I'm in an area with =
poor ipv6 connectivity I'd like to be given the option of explicitly =
going to an ipv4 site vs the ipv6 version.=20
>=20
> I'd also like to not damage SEO in the process though. ;-)
There has been a discussion of this in v6ops, around=20
=
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-v6-aaaa-whitelisting-implicati=
ons
"IPv6 AAAA DNS Whitelisting Implications", Jason Livingood, 22-Feb-11
and
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-happy-eyeballs
"Happy Eyeballs: Trending Towards Success with Dual-Stack Hosts", Dan
Wing, Andrew Yourtchenko, 14-Mar-11
In that context, you might review =
http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/80/slides/v6ops-12.pdf
Where you find a name ipv6.example.com, such as ipv6.google.com and =
www.v6.facebook.com, it is generally a place where the service is =
testing the IPv6 configuration prior to listing both the A and the AAAA =
record under the same name. The up side of giving them the same name is =
that the same content is viewable using IPv4 and IPv6; being IP-agnostic =
is a good thing. Unfortunately, at least right now, there is a =
side-effect. The side-effect is that a temporary network problem =
(routing loop etc) on one technology can be fixed by using the other, =
and the browsers don't necessarily fall back as one would wish. This =
works negatively against IPv6 deployment and customer satisfaction; it =
is not unusual for tech support people to respond to such questions with =
"turn off IPv6 and you won't have that problem".=20
Hence, content providers often separate the names to ensure that people =
only get the IPv6 experience if they expect it. And Google among others =
whitelists people for IPv6 DNS service based on their measurements of =
the client's path to google - if a bad experience is likely, they try to =
prevent it by not offering IPv6 names.
In general, I don't see a lot of difference between A and AAAA accesses, =
but I have had glitches when there was a network glitch. On one =
occasion, there was an IPv6 routing loop en route to www.ietf.org, but =
not one on the IPv4 path. The net result was a huge delay - it took =
nearly two minutes to download a page. The amusing part of that was that =
the same routing loop got in the way of reporting the issue to HE; I =
wound up sending an email rather than filing a case. Once it was fixed, =
matters returned to normal.=
