Some very nice broken IPv6 networks at Google and Akamai (Was: Some very nice IPv6 growth as measured by Google)

Job Snijders job at
Sun Nov 9 20:18:50 CET 2014

On Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 08:03:01PM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> > No. I feel that 250+ successes vs 10 failures is enough to conclude
> > that Akamai and Google are *not* universally broken, far from it.
> Testing from colod boxes on well behaved networks (otherwise they would
> not know or be part of the RING), while the problem lies with actual
> home users is quite a difference.

I can't comment on the validaty of the tests performed, but I'd like to
point out one thing: I like that the NLNOG RING is very diverse,
especially in terms of the node's IPv6 connectivity.

Some hosts are behind exotic 6to4 NATted tunnels, others behind regular
tunnels, some inadvertently block useful ICMPv6 messages, some networks
are just broken.

For NLNOG RING applications we mandate that there is 1 globally unique
IPv6 address on the host, we do not specify how this should be
accomplished. This leads to some variety, not all of those
implementations I would describe as "well behaved".

Kind regards,


More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list