NANOG 40 agenda posted
mtinka at africaonline.co.zw
Tue May 29 15:18:28 UTC 2007
On Tuesday 29 May 2007 15:21, Donald Stahl wrote:
> Can anyone think of a
> reason that a separate hostname for IPv6 services might
> cause problems or otherwise impact normal IPv4 users?
None that I can think of.
In the field, for servers/services we have enabled v6 on, we
have created parallel hostnames for v6 addresses, e.g.,
someservice + someservice6, e.t.c. This is mostly for the
period we continue to get an all-around feel for v6 on a
user/service/administration level; hopefully, we shall come
up with a more intuitive naming structure in the future, the
ultimate being the same names currently in use with v4.
We haven't seen any issues so far with either v4 or v6
connections/users (except for inexplicably marginally quicker
response times over v6, but that's another story).
In all cases, the v4 and v6 services live on the same box.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the NANOG