Strange, not for me.
nagios:/etc/nagios3# ping6 www.savvis.com
PING www.savvis.com(2001:460:100:1000::37) 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 2001:460:100:1000::37: icmp_seq=1 ttl=239 time=55.5 ms
64 bytes from 2001:460:100:1000::37: icmp_seq=2 ttl=239 time=55.4 ms
64 bytes from 2001:460:100:1000::37: icmp_seq=3 ttl=239 time=55.6 ms
64 bytes from 2001:460:100:1000::37: icmp_seq=4 ttl=239 time=55.4 ms
^C
--- www.savvis.com ping statistics ---
4 packets transmitted, 4 received, 0% packet loss, time 2999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 55.465/55.517/55.608/0.176 ms
nagios:/etc/nagios3# wget -6 www.savvis.com
--2011-09-05 20:57:08-- http://www.savvis.com/
Resolving www.savvis.com... 2001:460:100:1000::37
Connecting to www.savvis.com|2001:460:100:1000::37|:80... failed: Connection
refused.
nagios:/etc/nagios3#
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Andrews [mailto:ma...@isc.org]
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 8:55 PM
To: frnk...@iname.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down
for 10 days
In message<007f01cc6c37$0f4ac060$2de04120$@iname.com>, "Frank Bulk" writes:
A Chrome plugin alerted me to the fact that savvis.com has an AAAA for
www.savvis.com. Unfortunately access to that host over IPv6 is down, too.
Frank
The fault must be local to you. Works fine from here.
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 5:03 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been
down
for 10 days
Charter.com has also remove the quad-A's for www.charter.com. My
monitoring
system alerted me this afternoon that it couldn't get to the v6 version of
their website. Because of DNS caching, I don't know how many hours or
days
ago it was removed.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 11:59 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been
down
for 10 days
I just noticed that the quad-A records for both those two hosts are now
gone. DNS being what it is, I'm not sure when that happened, but our
monitoring system couldn't get the AAAA for www.qwest.com about half an
hour
ago.
Hopefully CenturyLink is actively working towards IPv6-enabling their
sites
again.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 11:14 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been
down
for 10 days
FYI, the issue is not resolved and I've not heard from either of the
companies suggesting that they're working on it.
Note their commitment to IPv6 in these releases:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/centurylink-joins-internet-community
-in-world-ipv6-day-123089908.html
http://news.centurylink.com/index.php?s=43&item=2129
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:m...@internode.com.au]
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 7:08 PM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been
down
for 10 days
On 19/08/2011, at 4:18 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
It'd really suck for end users to start actively avoiding IPv6
connectivity
because it keeps breaking and for organisations that have active AAAA
records to break peoples connectivity to their resources.
+1 -- I'm all for publishing AAAA records as everyone knows, but, if you
publish AAAA records for a consumer facing service, please support and
monitor that service with a similar level to what you do for your IPv4
versions of the service.
The coming years are going to be difficult enough for end-users without
adding unnecessary anti-IPv6 sentiments to the mix.
Owen
+1 to Owen's comment.
I'd also add some more comments:
A lot of eyeballs that have v6 right now are the people with a lot of
clue.
Do you want these people, who'll often be buying or recommending your
services to rate your ability to deliver as a fail? Our experience with
IPv6 consumer broadband has been that the early adopters are the people
who,
well, goto IETF meetings, follow standards and ask the bloody hard
questions.
Even given the Happy Eyeballs (Did Hurricane PAY for it to be abbrievated
as
HE?? :-) ) most end users prefer IPv6 over IPv4. Deeply this means there
is
a tendency for v6 traffic to grow and be more important to connectivity
than
you may imagine. The tipping point for IPv6 traffic being dominant I
suspect is going to be a lower threshold of take up than people might
expect. Consider this when thinking about the level of thought you give
to
IPv6 infrastructure and PPS rates.
MMC
