mailman.nanog.org ?

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

Hello All:

This should be fixed now.  We had a configuration issue early on and
manually added the IPv6 address to the interface, but forgot to manually
add the default gateway.

Regards,

Mike

On 7/27/11 2:32 AM, "Olipro" <olipro at uptheinter.net> wrote:

>On Wednesday 27 Jul 2011 08:39:04 Kurt Jaeger wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> The website is only reachable via v4, but dns announces v6 as well ?
>> 
>> $ any mailman.nanog.org
>> mailman.nanog.org has IPv6 address 2001:1838::cc5d:d48a
>> mailman.nanog.org has address 204.93.212.138
>> 
>> but:
>> 
>> traceroute6 to mailman.nanog.org (2001:1838::cc5d:d48a) from
>> 2001:14f8:2:2::1a, 64 hops max, 12 byte packets 1  gatekeeper-nepintern
>> 0.526 ms  0.286 ms  0.282 ms
>>  2  core3  0.513 ms  0.483 ms  0.491 ms
>>  3  2001:14f8:1:1:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff  6.113 ms  5.750 ms  5.862 ms
>>  4  LFnet.FRA-12-eth020-372.v6.lambdanet.net  10.726 ms  14.837 ms
>>9.872
>> ms 5  AMS-2-pos300.v6.lambdanet.net  42.095 ms  34.702 ms  40.840 ms 6
>> 2001:7f8:1::a500:4436:1  35.099 ms  34.987 ms  34.957 ms
>>  7  ae3-60g.cr1.ams2.nl.nlayer.net  34.972 ms  34.831 ms  34.853 ms
>>  8  xe-1-3-0-111.cr1.ams2.nl.nlayer.net  34.831 ms  35.306 ms  34.942 ms
>>  9  unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  35.855 ms  35.868 ms
>>     unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  35.894 ms
>> 10  unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  185.057 ms
>>     unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  127.401 ms  85.189 ms
>> 11  unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  178.873 ms
>>     unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  178.256 ms  214.091 ms
>> 12  unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  176.114 ms
>>     unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  213.318 ms
>>     unknown.ipv6.scnet.net  187.660 ms
>> 
>> Similar from RIPE RIS looking glass.
>> 
>> traceroute to 2001:1838::cc5d:d48a (2001:1838::cc5d:d48a), 30 hops max,
>>40
>> byte packets 1  gw.ipv6.dev.nikrtr.ripe.net (2001:67c:2e8:2::1:1)  0.814
>> ms  0.982 ms  1.121 ms 2  amsix-501.xe-0-0-0.jun1.bit-1.network.bit.nl
>> (2001:7f8:1::a501:2859:2)  1.898 ms  1.910 ms  1.949 ms 3
>> 20gigabitethernet1-3.core1.ams1.ipv6.he.net (2001:7f8:1::a500:6939:1)
>> 3.658 ms  3.588 ms  3.620 ms 4  2001:7f8:1::a500:4436:1
>> (2001:7f8:1::a500:4436:1)  4.439 ms  4.275 ms  4.382 ms 5
>> ae3-60g.cr1.ams2.nl.nlayer.net (2001:590::4516:8bee)  3.881 ms  3.792
>>ms 
>> 3.860 ms 6  xe-1-3-0-111.cr1.ams2.nl.nlayer.net (2001:590::4516:8b02)
>> 4.023 ms  4.015 ms  4.047 ms 7  unknown.ipv6.scnet.net
>> (2001:1838::cdea:dcc2)  5.262 ms  5.291 ms  5.330 ms 8
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838::cdea:ff12)  103.729 ms
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838::cdea:dcc9)  5.194 ms  5.493 ms 9
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838::cdea:ff12)  103.796 ms
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838::4b66:3e9)  109.000 ms  109.440 ms 10
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838::4b66:3e9)  109.204 ms
>> unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838:2000::4b66:42)  128.785 ms  129.019 ms
>> 11  * unknown.ipv6.scnet.net (2001:1838:2000::4b66:42)  129.432 ms * 12
>> *
>> * *
>> 13  * * *
>> 
>> Any ideas ?
>
>Yes, their mailman is indeed broken over IPv6, I've CC'd them on this
>e-mail, 
>you can also contact them directly if you wish.