IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: question: are the various IETF web sites IPv6 enabled? If not, why not?

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 09 March 2021 03:57 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5872D3A0DCD for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:57:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h5eWGLbtKAMU for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:57:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EEF63A0DC6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 19:57:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id y67so8642475pfb.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 19:57:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=EgBDVwBtmUTd/sYeYdddsphOOLMxAjzvkVQY/oYdDTY=; b=uM7+7xeUaA+Bv/btuQ5chE7tbJ9RYhjQ4ZzWEN5/raVWK+H7Y2hPKjzGGr11H31al2 au2YJO0dYnm9HSpj1bCyKH076U0yGQn5PE12RtpFpskjPn8au9TK6490T8VidGgB8wzI uVGIowlEwLffbaMvwnOxhHDH9WmVWbnyP3PpuJV/Dk47vaA2LfJX+tk4SZi1DIllDskG XM24rtmMT6z2WG4giHGlF29QOCQZnA125zR5MyJ7WGXutEdZFRqAR1xlIt4S8bPHnunO TdbFtmH4rp18+oiGl+bRbmxnGVvfSNevseTGtnh7db0BC6skn2/Nl3skspT4zOYcbZTW fFXA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EgBDVwBtmUTd/sYeYdddsphOOLMxAjzvkVQY/oYdDTY=; b=oLoAz6sJWouYfM0oiEWAfLZu922i9m1zT/pzR2jzHIUe6LmclbP06dQhDb09L1ETWx PC28R33NLOTaq2n/D2AXVZgUkhPxKyOAj0kyfRup1ziq5K6oTdqToTIt647Srt1FHkex B+6x7N3MjjxdHwBYJV4albsrPUgzoL0McnYDWew4H1Gi7nmDiN8Mw36mgni0EX4sG/7w kNjoOyLO1gmSisSLy2LlE0uVmQWufLx/18FSPtBCzf79SsSPJqiuiyUxkgq8DYBON4A2 mWHpc4G01lXIQlyLOwNrHkzsANA8IAf229fvtFhxG+HD4hHYCoyTWPkEM46BIJtYA+oU r93A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5332ftkgFRoJc49v6sn3/z6geBOLIjix/187i9BR9bBUyJu4thn0 ZYUdqCCXt03uQ202W4EvE9MnyW1vUhADIg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwn9LcVKMcv4vadSx9nxjlHvqLw9LMPz+D9utG88zJB9Sd5APAR2A6pi97FhWUar+iKQ6nEFg==
X-Received: by 2002:a65:4386:: with SMTP id m6mr3480207pgp.384.1615262230304; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 19:57:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.131.28]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 82sm11047526pfv.19.2021.03.08.19.57.08 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Mar 2021 19:57:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: question: are the various IETF web sites IPv6 enabled? If not, why not?
To: "Baird, John M CTR OSD HPCMP (USA)" <john.m.baird10.ctr@mail.mil>
References: <20210309033054.6D9756FD971F@ary.qy>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <c5406178-e38f-eed0-7cb6-1f799a6c93e6@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 16:57:05 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210309033054.6D9756FD971F@ary.qy>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/d1Q_SZbryzNFw0_DlmMWzSduIKg>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 03:57:13 -0000

On 09-Mar-21 16:30, John Levine wrote:
> In article <4CC47F19-3063-430F-8378-B00EB7E2708F@gmail.com> you write:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>> It is my understanding that they all are, and have been for some time. I might suggest that you ping6 (or ping -6 depending on your OS) to see whether you
>> get a response.
> 
> Yes, they all are.  The mail is, too.

https://www.irtf.org/ too.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/ too.
https://www.internetsociety.org/ too.

The "six or not" FireFox extension tells me that the ISOC site invokes a couple of IPv4 services, so needs dual stack. The IETF site is clean in that regard.

   Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email