[187214] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The IPv6 Travesty that is Cogent's refusal to peer Hurricane
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew D. Hardeman)
Fri Jan 22 21:02:40 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Matthew D. Hardeman" <mhardeman@ipifony.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPKkNb7sDUnDu+fCcQqYmpqFsYM1F2qOq+r+uWgecv8Rn6EFpg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 20:02:35 -0600
To: "Constantine A. Murenin" <mureninc@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
While I agree it=E2=80=99s still going to be a while before it becomes a =
critical issue, more and more environments are going IPv6 first with =
IPv4 as a NAT=E2=80=99ed service=E2=80=A6
I think the mobile carriers are going to be the ones to really push =
adoption.
> On Jan 22, 2016, at 7:53 PM, Constantine A. Murenin =
<mureninc@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> On 21 January 2016 at 19:42, Matthew D. Hardeman =
<mhardeman@ipifony.com> wrote:
>> An excellent point. Nobody would tolerate this in IPv4 land. Those =
disputes tended to end in days and weeks (sometimes months), but not =
years.
>>=20
>> That said, as IPv6 is finally gaining traction, I suspect we=E2=80=99ll=
be seeing less tolerance for this behavior.
>=20
> Nope. Most user-facing apps are in support of Happy Eyeballs.
>=20
> When Facebook's FB.ME was down on IPv6 just a short while ago in 2013,
> it took DAYS for anyone to notice.
>=20
> http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2013-May/005571.html
>=20
> Lots of popular sites publish AAAA with non-reachable services all the
> time, and still noone notices to this day.
>=20
> The old school command line tools are the only ones affected. One may
> also notice it with `ssh -D` SOCKS5 proxying, but only if one's
> browser doesn't decide to leak out hostname resolution and operate
> directly with IPv4-addresses to start with, like Chrome does.
>=20
> Cheers,
> Constantine.SU.
