I don't think freebsd-stable is suitable for this thread, so dropped
it from cc: list.
>I don't agree. There may be differences what one means with 'production'
>though. Personally, if I had a power to switch on IPv6 on www.google.com
>hosts, I would only do it by adding www.ipv6.google.com: NOT with
>www.google.com. People who are afraid of degrading service and it costing
>real money are reluctant.
it depends on how you run your IPv4/v6 servers. for instance, we are
running ftp.iij.ad.jp, one of the most famous anonymous ftp server in
Japan, dual-stacked. this is because we think it robust enough.
for our company website, www.iij.ad.jp, we do like this:
the we are using is like this:
- "www.iij.ad.jp" has A record and AAAA record. there actually are
two machines.
- "A" record for www.iij.ad.jp points to one of them, which runs very
stable version of IPv4. the machine has the actual data.
- "AAAA" record for www.iij.ad.jp points to another one, which NFS-
mounts the data partition from IPv4 one.
we do monitor them closely, and they have impressive uptime.
if you run www.ipv6.google.com, people won't be able to smoothly
migrate to IPv6. i believe it a major drawback.
my point is, there are a lot of ways you can operate dual-stack
services, and you just need to make a right choice.
>An example of potentially technically capable stuff: IPv6 service of
>playground.sun.com/ipv6/ was down/out-of-sync some time ago.. and that
>isn't even a "production" site.
i guess this is because IPv6 variant of playground.sun.com has not
been given enough babysitting/monitoring. I don't like it to be seen
as an example of lousiness of IPv6. it is lousy operation that causes
trouble, not lousy protocol/implementation.
(i'm not blaming those who administer playground.sun.com)
itojun
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The IPv6 Users Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe users" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
