On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Brion Vibber <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Jay Ashworth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If we NAT between the squids and the apaches, will that adversely affect
>> the ability of MW to *know* the outside site's IP address when that's v6?
>>
>> You're not just changing addresses, you're changing address *families*;
>> is there a standard wrapper for the entire IPv4 address space into v6?
>> (I should know that, but I don't.)
>>
>
> There's no reason to NAT between the squid proxies and apaches -- they share
> a private network, with a private IPv4 address space which is nowhere near
> being exhausted.
>
> Front-end proxies need to speak IPv6 to the outside world so they can accept
> connections from IPv6 clients, add the clients' IPv6 addresses to the HTTP
> X-Forwarded-For header which gets passed to the Apaches, and then return the
> response body back to the client.
>
> The actual backend Apache servers can happily hum along on IPv4 internally,
> with no impact on IPv6 accessibility of the site.

XFF mode forwarding seems to make the problem pretty much go away, yes.

Thanks for confirming that's what's in use.


-- 
-george william herbert
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to