From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 17 12:36:32 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49F1316A469 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:36:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com) Received: from mail.ticketswitch.com (mail.ticketswitch.com [194.200.93.188]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A9E813C48A for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:36:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from petefrench@ticketswitch.com) Received: from dilbert.rattatosk ([10.50.50.6] helo=dilbert.ticketswitch.com) by mail.ticketswitch.com with esmtp (Exim 4.67 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1IXFq2-0003aY-7X; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:36:30 +0100 Received: from petefrench by dilbert.ticketswitch.com with local (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1IXFq2-0002Cu-6f; Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:36:30 +0100 To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Trond.Endrestol@fagskolen.gjovik.no In-Reply-To: <20070917135731.N18299@ramstind.fig.ol.no> Message-Id: From: Pete French Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 13:36:30 +0100 Cc: Subject: Re: BIND 9.3.1 - How to get rid of AAAA querys? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 12:36:32 -0000 since we are talking about IPv6, how do people genarlly find it on FreeBSD? I use 6to4 in a number of places, but have had a few problems with it unfortunately - one of the most annoying being dropped TCP connections which lead to me turning it off on my home machine. The other problem I had was connecting through the 6to4 machine freezing for 30 seconds or so after they start getting data, and thehn returning the rest of the data a few seconds later. Performance has also been poor compared to IPv4. Has anyone else has experineces like this ? I only have 6to4 available to test with, so this may be 6to4 specific I guess (my performance tests have been between to 6to4 machines compared to the same machines using IP4 only, so the packets should be taking the same route as I understand it) Any comments? -pcf.