Test your connectivity for World IPv6 Day
frnkblk at iname.com
Tue Jun 7 19:14:18 CEST 2011
The next 48 hours are a good time to discover the brokenness and recommend
best practices to those with that brokenness. If we make sure that all the
links we manage are optimally configured and report any issues we have with
those participating in W6D, then we're starting off on the right foot.
From: ipv6-ops-bounces+frnkblk=iname.com at lists.cluenet.de
[mailto:ipv6-ops-bounces+frnkblk=iname.com at lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 7:00 AM
To: Rémi Després
Cc: Marc Blanchet; ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
Subject: Re: Test your connectivity for World IPv6 Day
On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 01:55:35PM +0200, Rémi Després wrote:
> As detailed in my last answer to Fred, 1280 seems the best choice, at
least in IPv6.
> Can we agree on this?
I'm not agreeing. Crippling the protocol by restricting ourselves to use
the least common denominator all the time, except only in those case where
full packet sizes are not working (there might even be 9000-clear paths)
is not the way *forward*.
We need to assume a working internet and fix the remaining breakage, instead
of assuming a broken everything and shying away from doing anything that
might not work for 0.001% of the cases - number made up ad-hoc, but I'm
sitting behind a less-than-1500 DSL line, and I hardly ever see PMTU
problems so far. There were bugs in some OSes and some virtualization
solutions, but they got *fixed* - and how did they get fixed? By using
larger MTUs, noticing that it breaks, and resolving the root cause!
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
More information about the ipv6-ops