On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 11:46 AM John Von Essen <j...@essenz.com> wrote:
> I was having a debate with someone on this. Take a critical web site, > say one where you want 100% global uptime, no potential issues with end > users having connectivity or routing issues getting to your IP. Would it > be advantageous to purposely not support a AAAA record in DNS and > disable IPv6, only exist on IPv4? > No > My argument against this was "Broken IPv6 Connectivity" doesn't really > occur anymore, also, almost all browsers and OS IP stacks implement > Happy Eyeballs algorithm where both v4 and v6 are attempted, so if v6 > dies it will try v4. I would also argue that lack of IPv6 technically > makes the site unreachable from native IPv6 clients, and in the event of > an IPv4 outage, connectivity might still remain on IPv6 if the site had > an IPv6 address (I've experienced scenarios with a bad IPv4 BGP session, > but the IPv6 session remained up and transiting traffic...) > > Thoughts? > Correct, the broken ipv6 thing is super rare and those rare event are solved with Happy eyeballs. There are well over 100 million ipv6-only Android and iOS devices in north america alone. Failing to deploy ipv6 on the website means they get to share capacity on a CGN, ip repution issues, and indirection to reach the CGN. FB, Google, Netflix, Akamai and other push ipv6 because it is good for business, the business of running money making content. > > -John > > > >
