[186797] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Another Big day for IPv6 - 10% native penetration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Jan 4 17:19:03 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <97867.1451942516@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:17:56 -0800
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Jan 4, 2016, at 13:21 , Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
>=20
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:59:40 -0800, Owen DeLong said:
>=20
>> These numbers might be slightly pessimistic because 3XX series =
responses are
>> not counted as good.
>=20
> They may be a *lot* more than slightly pessimistic - consider the case =
of
> any site that uses 3xx replies to redirect to a geo-IP based server =
rather
> than doing it in DNS (which has the problem that you're redirecting =
based
> on the IP of the DNS server that asked, which will fail miserably for
> anybody using 8.8.8.8 as their DNS server)
I say slightly pessimistic because there aren=E2=80=99t all that many =
3XX responses
being reported.
Further, 8.8.8.8 actually fully supports EDNS0 Client Subnet capability, =
so
if the geo-IP balancer in question wants, they can eliminate the failure =
mode
you are describing in that case.
However, in either case, I=E2=80=99ll happily give you a copy of the =
code if you want
to enhance it to detect 3XX responses that redirect to an IPv6 capable =
site
vs. 3XX responses that redirect to an IPv4 only site in a sort of slight =
of hand
designed to trick scripts like this one (yes, there are some of those =
out there
last time I looked).
Owen
