fp.o content via IPv6

[Allen Kistler]

Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 05:16:23AM +0000, Daniel Drown wrote:
>> That said, the various MSS fixes (point #2 and the origional poster's
>> iptables command) avoid the problem for TCP.
> 
> rhel5, which is what we're running in production, has a kernel old
> enough that it doesn't have the iptables --clamp-mss-to-pmtu
> capability for ipv6.

The server side shouldn't need it.  The option is used to make up for
something broken on the other side of a lower MTU link.  fp.o is native
IPv6, isn't it?  No tunnel?

> We've had over 5000 successful connections using ipv6 this week, and
> about 5 _reported_ failures.  In the same time, we've had millions of
> successful v4 connections.  I'm inclined to believe the failures,
> while annoying, are still few and far between compared with the rest
> of our traffic.  I'm not quite ready to turn off ipv6 again, or switch
> to forcing "knowledgable" users to use www.ipv6.fp.o, as it would drop
> our IPv6 userbase to effectively zero.

In a previous note, Mike M reported spending more hours (his, yours, and
others') than he liked tracking down connectivity problems.  It would be
enlightening to know if there was a common thread.