We could instead advertise www.ipv6.fp.o and make people choose to use v6 or not. Google does this today for exactly these reasons (failures elsewhere in the network we can't control). Kind of defeats the purpose though. -- Matt Domsch Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux -----Original Message----- From: Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 08:20:34 To: Fedora Infrastructure<fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: fp.o content via IPv6 On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, Allen Kistler wrote: > In case other 6to4 clients can't figure out why fp.o is beyond their > reach over IPv6, here's some fixing I did to make access to fp.o over > 6to4 work for me. > > I hadn't had a problem with hanging connections to other IPv6 sites, but > I have for fp.o. I heard from Mike M on IRC that others had reduced > their MTU to get 6to4 to work with fp.o. > > Starting there, my eventual solution was to put the following in the > mangle table in ip6tables on my 6to4 router (all one line, of course): > > -A FORWARD -o tun6to4 -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS > --clamp-mss-to-pmtu > > 6to4 has an MTU of 1480 for most people, but 1472 for DSL. Probably > something isn't generating an ICMP packet-too-big to send back to fp.o > when the link MTU drops. Alternatively the packet could be getting > dropped in transit or ignored by fp.o. Of course, clamping MSS in > ip6tables only works for TCP. > ipv6 has caused a lot of problems for certain people, very non-obvious, takes several hours to fix problems. I wonder if there's anything more we can do on our end. -Mike _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
