I just noticed that my uploads to PyPI are now using IPv4 instead of IPv6. Looking closer it looks like PyPI is not reachable over IPv6 at all anymore, which is somewhat disappointing. Was dropping IPv6 a deliberate choice, or an unfortunate side-effect of switching to Fastly’s CDN? Regards, Wichert.
Both, supporting IPv6 is not a priority and so no extra work will be done for it. This is true across the board for all PSF services. --Noah On Jun 10, 2014, at 2:40 AM, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
I just noticed that my uploads to PyPI are now using IPv4 instead of IPv6. Looking closer it looks like PyPI is not reachable over IPv6 at all anymore, which is somewhat disappointing. Was dropping IPv6 a deliberate choice, or an unfortunate side-effect of switching to Fastly’s CDN?
Regards, Wichert. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
IPv6 (on AMS-IX) currently accounts for 20G/s of traffic at peak times compared to 2.8T/s overall. That said, the amount of traffic that IPv6 generates has almost quadrupled since August last year. Stating that IPv6 is not on the PSF's list of priorities is, as far as I'm concerned, short sighted. It doesn't have to work tomorrow but it should be on the list of things to get to. PyPi not being available over IPv6 anymore is not "we're not willing to do extra work to enable it", it's a regression. I understand that this is not something the PSF can solve but it should at least push Fastly to roll out IPv6. -- Daniele Sluijters On 10 June 2014 12:20, Noah Kantrowitz <noah@coderanger.net> wrote:
Both, supporting IPv6 is not a priority and so no extra work will be done for it. This is true across the board for all PSF services.
--Noah
On Jun 10, 2014, at 2:40 AM, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
I just noticed that my uploads to PyPI are now using IPv4 instead of IPv6. Looking closer it looks like PyPI is not reachable over IPv6 at all anymore, which is somewhat disappointing. Was dropping IPv6 a deliberate choice, or an unfortunate side-effect of switching to Fastly’s CDN?
Regards, Wichert. _______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
_______________________________________________ Distutils-SIG maillist - Distutils-SIG@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig
-- Daniele Sluijters
On Jun 10, 2014, at 7:44 AM, Daniele Sluijters <daniele.sluijters@gmail.com> wrote:
IPv6 (on AMS-IX) currently accounts for 20G/s of traffic at peak times compared to 2.8T/s overall. That said, the amount of traffic that IPv6 generates has almost quadrupled since August last year. Stating that IPv6 is not on the PSF's list of priorities is, as far as I'm concerned, short sighted. It doesn't have to work tomorrow but it should be on the list of things to get to.
PyPi not being available over IPv6 anymore is not "we're not willing to do extra work to enable it", it's a regression. I understand that this is not something the PSF can solve but it should at least push Fastly to roll out IPv6.
I'm pretty sure the thing is that there are many more important things that are of a higher priority than IPv6 support. While IPv6 support is nice to have, it also doesn't generally matter unless there is someone trying to connect to PyPI who has no IPv4 connectivity. I don't believe it to be likely that there is many, if any, people who do not have IPv4 connectivity else they'd be unable to reach vast parts of the internet. I'm sure at some point Fastly will have IPv6 connectivity, at which point there won't be any major reason *not* to turn it on. ----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
On 10 June 2014 22:59, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
On Jun 10, 2014, at 7:44 AM, Daniele Sluijters <daniele.sluijters@gmail.com> wrote:
PyPi not being available over IPv6 anymore is not "we're not willing to do extra work to enable it", it's a regression. I understand that this is not something the PSF can solve but it should at least push Fastly to roll out IPv6.
I'm pretty sure the thing is that there are many more important things that are of a higher priority than IPv6 support. While IPv6 support is nice to have, it also doesn't generally matter unless there is someone trying to connect to PyPI who has no IPv4 connectivity. I don't believe it to be likely that there is many, if any, people who do not have IPv4 connectivity else they'd be unable to reach vast parts of the internet.
The thread prompted me to go back and check the status of IPv4 availability, at least in APAC, since IANA originally ran out of /8 blocks a few years back. It turns out APNIC is still parcelling out their last /8 block, and the IANA's reclamation of unused IPv4 blocks also freed up some addresses for reallocation. (I tried to look up the status for Africa as well, but didn't find any clear statement in a quick search).
I'm sure at some point Fastly will have IPv6 connectivity, at which point there won't be any major reason *not* to turn it on.
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
On 10 Jun 2014, at 15:09, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 June 2014 22:59, Donald Stufft <donald@stufft.io> wrote:
On Jun 10, 2014, at 7:44 AM, Daniele Sluijters <daniele.sluijters@gmail.com> wrote:
PyPi not being available over IPv6 anymore is not "we're not willing to do extra work to enable it", it's a regression. I understand that this is not something the PSF can solve but it should at least push Fastly to roll out IPv6.
I'm pretty sure the thing is that there are many more important things that are of a higher priority than IPv6 support. While IPv6 support is nice to have, it also doesn't generally matter unless there is someone trying to connect to PyPI who has no IPv4 connectivity. I don't believe it to be likely that there is many, if any, people who do not have IPv4 connectivity else they'd be unable to reach vast parts of the internet.
The thread prompted me to go back and check the status of IPv4 availability, at least in APAC, since IANA originally ran out of /8 blocks a few years back. It turns out APNIC is still parcelling out their last /8 block, and the IANA's reclamation of unused IPv4 blocks also freed up some addresses for reallocation. (I tried to look up the status for Africa as well, but didn't find any clear statement in a quick search).
If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories. Wichert.
On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet: https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6- That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach that point.
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories.
I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
Looks like Latin America has reached the point of no return: http://www.lacnic.net/en/web/anuncios/2014-no-hay-mas-direcciones-ipv4-en-la... (article is in English) On 10 June 2014 15:47, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet: https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6-
That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach that point.
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories.
I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already.
Cheers, Nick.
-- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
-- Daniele Sluijters
On 10 Jun 2014, at 15:47, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet: https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6-
I saw that and was very disappointed by Fastly. It means I won't consider using them for anything I do at this point in time.
That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach that point.
Is the PSF willing to ask push Fastly a little bit on this, so we at least have timeframe?
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories.
I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already.
It’s very viable right now I’ld say. If I remember correctly Cloudflare has a free service where they add an IPv4 frontend for IPv6-only servers so you can still provide service to IPv4-only users. Wichert.
On Jun 10, 2014, at 10:00 AM, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
On 10 Jun 2014, at 15:47, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 June 2014 23:22, Wichert Akkerman <wichert@wiggy.net> wrote:
If I remember correctly there are some mobile networks in Asia who only do IPv6 internally. Gandi offers IPv6-only servers that are cheaper than servers with ipv4 connectivity. So while right now not having IPv4 connectivity is unlikely, it does happen and will only become more common. People are also introducing monstrosities like carrier-grade NAT to delay the inevitable, but we really should not encourage that madness and just add IPv6. It generally is very easy to do.
The challenge is that PyPI now runs behind a donated CDN service, and our vendor doesn't offer IPv6 yet: https://fastly.zendesk.com/entries/30549708-Do-you-support-IPv6-
I saw that and was very disappointed by Fastly. It means I won't consider using them for anything I do at this point in time.
Eh, like anything it's a value judgment. Fastly has been great for us and it has made scaling PyPI massively easier and just better overall. I wouldn't want to try to handle the ~78TB and ~891M requests that PyPI got in May (or ~108TB/~1.1B requests for all of Python.org via Fastly) without Fastly, especially not for something like IPv6.
That means that, for the time being "the PyPI CDN is generously donated by Fastly" trumps "the PyPI CDN supports IPv6" - IPv6 support isn't currently high enough on the priority list for us to be willing to turn down Fastly's offer. That trade-off may change some day, but I expect Fastly will have already added IPv6 support before we reach that point.
Is the PSF willing to ask push Fastly a little bit on this, so we at least have timeframe?
We don't need to push them, we have a real amicable relationship :) I just popped into their IRC channel and asked, they said that IPv6 is on their radar and planned for the future but they do not have an ETA. We're unlikely to do anything but wait for Fastly at this point. Perhaps if push came to shove we'd setup a ipv6.pypi.python.org which doesn't route through Fastly but we're not setup for that currently and it'd take a bit of effort to do so. Effort we'd much rather spend elsewhere right now. Of course PyPI supports mirroring, so if someone believes that ipv6 support is important for package installs all it takes is a server with some bandwidth, ~80GB of HD space, and an IPv6 address to host a IPv6 mirror. It's like it wouldn't get near as much traffic as PyPI itself does so it wouldn't require as much as PyPI does to power it.
It's something we'll want to keep an eye on, but yeah, at this point in time, when connecting an IPv6-only system to the internet, PyPI is likely to be long way down the "it isn't working" priority list.
I have an ipv6-only VM, and it works wonderfully: it can send email, pull Debian updates, serve IPv6 websites and it has my remote backups and git-annex repositories.
I was thinking of the client case, but you're right, in a server context, IPv6 only is far more likely to be viable already.
It’s very viable right now I’ld say. If I remember correctly Cloudflare has a free service where they add an IPv4 frontend for IPv6-only servers so you can still provide service to IPv4-only users.
Wichert.
----------------- Donald Stufft PGP: 0x6E3CBCE93372DCFA // 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA
participants (5)
-
Daniele Sluijters -
Donald Stufft -
Nick Coghlan -
Noah Kantrowitz -
Wichert Akkerman