Mark Prior via ipv6-wg <[email protected]> wrote: > The cases where it gets to a 200 are fine as that's "success" but there are > some failure modes that I can't really make my mind up on so having some > feedback would be potentially useful.
What percentage are these failures? Maybe it's just noise.
> In all these cases I see a site with A and AAAA records so I connect on
port
> 80 of the IPv6 address(es).
What if they have only AAAA?
> 1. If the connection fails should I just report that or should I do
anything
> more? For example see if the site responds via IPv4.
The site could just be down/broken. So checking with v4 kinda makes sense.
> 2. If the connection succeeds (so I assume there should be a working IPv6
> based web server) but after querying it with a HTTP/1.1 message sees the
site
> resets the connection (or fails in some other manner).
That sounds like it's behind a v6-capable/enthusiastic CDN, and the origin web
site is broken.
> 3. The connection succeeds as does the query and I get a 301 redirect to a
> location that fails to connect (typically it's the https port but could be
> another domain name). Again is this enough or should it do something
> else?
I think that this is the biggest question.
I'd mark it as down for now.
> Finally in some cases I'll get a HTTP status code such as 403, 429 or 503
> rather than 200 and these are reported with a background of either light
> green or light red depending on whether it occurred on an IPv6 or IPv4
> connection. Should these be blue rather than a different green/red?
Keep them green/red.
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
