On killing IPv6 transition mechanisms

[Jeroen Massar]

Erik Kline wrote:
>> The google folks can tell you better what their motives are for not
>> enabling IPv6 without the whitelist, but there
[..]
> But IPv6-related breakage is not of the
> "all-or-nothing-so-I'd-better-get-it-figured-out" variety.  It only
> affects the sites who advertise AAAAs.

I guess you will agree with me though that even if you don't publish
AAAA records, that when the CPE's DNS is intercepting DNS packets or
acting as a caching resolver and the user enables IPv6 in one form or
another, and that DNS caching resolver drops requests for AAAA records
that one is still broken. Same thing for retry-over-TCP for that matter
as there are lots of setups that block port 53 TCP.... *sigh* (and then
large TXT queries don't go through properly and also slow down everything).

As such, the google-IPv6-whitelisting program does avoid the latency
issue and the part where ISPs would get lots of customer complaints
(which I think would be a good thing as they maybe would start enabling
IPv6), it does not avoid people with broken (CPE) DNS which drop AAAA
requests when their OS is IPv6 enabled (ubuntu has many very long
"disable IPv6" threads :)

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20100316/2d3d4b8c/attachment.sig>