IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been down for 10 days

Thu Aug 18 18:48:50 UTC 2011

On Aug 18, 2011, at 4:47 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:

> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnkblk at iname.com]
>> Sent: 18 August 2011 06:36
>> To: nanog at nanog.org
>> Subject: IPv6 version of www.qwest.com/www.centurylink.com has been
>> down for 10 days
>> 
>> The IPv6 version of www.qwest.com has been down for 10 days.  Wget
>> shows a
>> 301 to www.centurylink.com, but that also fails.  Emails to the nocs at
>> both
>> companies have gone unanswered.  Unless HE is deployed in a web
>> browser,
>> this behavior leads to a bad end-user experience.
>> 
>> If anyone can prod either of these two companies that would be much
>> appreciated.
>> 
>> Frank
> 
> It seems that any IPv6 efforts by organisations are best effort at most with of course some notable exceptions who seem to offer a really very good service (HE for example). It's starting to get to a point now, I think, that some end users have IPv6 (Andrews and Arnold have offered IPv6 for years) and issues such as these are just going to start to give IPv6 a bad name in the eyes of consumers.
> 
> 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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20110818/ae7d9795/attachment.bin>