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

[Tore Anderson]

* Jeroen Massar

> 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.

So far you've been claiming that the problem lies with Google or
Akamai. If true - and I don't dispute that it is - then testing from
the RING should work just as well as from any home network.

And, as Job has pointed out, the RING nodes are not all «well behaved».

> Also the statement "universally broken" comes from you.

I refer to this blanket statement of yours, responding to my
paraphrasing you and Yannis:

«Yannis: «We're enabling IPv6 on our CPEs
Jeroen: «And then getting broken connectivity to Google»

You: «That statement is correct though. As Google and Akamai IPv6 are
currently broken, enabling IPv6 thus breaks connectivity to those
sites. Not enabling IPv6 thus is a better option in such a situation.»

In order for this to be correct, Google and Akamai must necessarily be
universally broken over IPv6.

If on the other hand the problem is not universal, but only occurring in
a certain corner cases (such as "when hitting the cluster in Mexico
City", "when client is behind a <1500B MTU link", or whatever), then
you have no reason to claim that ISPs in general (like OTE) will
break connectivity to Akamai and Google when they enable IPv6.

> > Thus refuting the claim that «Google and Akamai IPv6 are currently
> > broken, enabling IPv6 thus breaks connectivity to those sites».
> 
> As Google has admitted "fixing" it, you have been proven wrong.

I don't dispute that there is or has been *a* problem, only the scope
of it.

The way I see it, most of the available data points to there indeed
being a problem specific to tunnels/PMTUD (which I've said all along,
cf. "tunnels suck"). Perhaps Google turned up a new cluster and forgot
to enable TCP MSS clamping or something like that. No idea about the
Akamai one.

> Actually, I wonder why you are trying to fight so hard that various
> people have reported this problem. You are apparently not working for
> either Google or Akamai, you are not an access network, your network
> is not involved either; hence... what is your problem with such a
> statement?

My problem is with your claim that «not enabling IPv6 thus is a better
option in such a situation».

Whatever the problem is or was, it did not affect everyone - most
likely it affected just a tiny fraction of users - otherwise I think we
would have heard way more complaints from all over. There are millions
of IPv6 users out there in the world, and without Google(+YouTube/GMail)
and Akamai(+Facebook), "internet doesn't work".

With no more specifics known about what went wrong, ISPs have zero
reason to stall their IPv6 rollouts, since there is no reason to assume
that they will be impacted by the problem. So: OTE.gr, Telefonica.cz,
Telenor.no, Telepac.pt, and others - go go go!

BTW: Some of our customers are heavy users of Akamai for video
streaming, and many have lots of interaction with various Google
services. So I have plenty of reason to care about any problem of
theirs.

Tore