On 06/06/2012 10:24 PM, Scott Armitage wrote:
> How did IPv6 Launch go for sites. Unfortunately, due to some
> blacklisting by google our IPv6 traffic has massively decreased now (See
> image). Hopefully over sites had better luck.

tl;dr - aside from the blacklist, very little of note. Much as was the 
case last year.


As you're no doubt aware, we had the same issue. Thread here, for the 
curious:

http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2012-June/007008.html

In the end, I became convinced that Google were mistaken in some fashion 
- I simply don't see evidence that we have IPv6 brokenness, and 
certainly not to the 2% level - so I cheated and changed the query 
source of our resolvers to dodge the blacklist. Once done, we ran at our 
"usual" rate of 100-200Mbit/sec of IPv6.

I am still discussing the brokenness readings with Google.

Absent the blacklist, we didn't see any problems - a bunch of our 
inbound services were enabled in preparation, including our two main 
websites and our Exchange services (IMAP/POP/MAPI/Web). Some other 
services (inbound MX, outbound SMTP, edge subnets) have been 
IPv6-enabled for some time.

About the only problem we saw in the run-up to the day was in the 
translational IPv6->IPv4 load-balancing we're doing for one service 
(Oracle Portal, which doesn't do IPv6 yet). Unlike the NAT64 lash-up we 
did last year, we're doing that on our newly upgraded Cisco ACE30, which 
in theory support translational load-balancing.

Unfortunately there seems to be a slight bug (again) with path MTU 
discovery in this config; the ACE fails to subtract 20 bytes from the 
MTU when translating the ICMPv6 "packet too big" message as per section 
5.2 of RFC 6145. We have a bug open with Cisco, but no progress as yet.

In the end, we solved this by using the linux "route" command to clamp 
the MTU/MSS (both were needed - seems to be a bug in Linux) towards the 
NAT pool used for the translation. This worked fine.

One thing to note: we're still IPv6-less on our wireless, as we haven't 
deployed enough of the new controllers to retire our older WiSMv1 which 
don't do IPv6.

Cheers,
Phil