Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5F6AF9556 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 15:27:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 89844 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jan 2012 15:27:15 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-trafficserver-users-archive@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 89743 invoked by uid 500); 3 Jan 2012 15:27:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@trafficserver.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@trafficserver.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@trafficserver.apache.org Received: (qmail 89735 invoked by uid 99); 3 Jan 2012 15:27:14 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:27:14 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [216.200.145.35] (HELO imta-38.everyone.net) (216.200.145.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 15:27:05 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (omta001 [127.0.0.1]) by imta-38.everyone.net (8.14.4/8.14.4) with SMTP id q03FQAeX010555 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 07:26:44 -0800 X-Eon-Dm: dm0202 Received: by dm0202.mta.everyone.net (EON-AUTHRELAY2[SSL] - 62d49098) id dm0202.4ed9cfe4.5258403 for ; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 07:26:43 -0800 X-Eon-Sig: AQNNi8pPAx4zqQRhaQIAAAAB,14b3fb89507171cb9a99a621352a687d X-Originating-Ip: 98.212.144.152 Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 09:26:44 -0600 From: "Alan M. Carroll" Organization: Network Geographics, Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <602608160.20120103092644@network-geographics.com> To: Jan-Frode Myklebust Subject: Re: Status of IPv6 support In-Reply-To: <20120103141527.GA3751@dibs.tanso.net> References: <20120103141527.GA3751@dibs.tanso.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.5.7110,1.0.211,0.0.0000 definitions=2012-01-03_03:2012-01-03,2012-01-03,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 ipscore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=6.0.2-1012030000 definitions=main-1201030112 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org It's in a bit of an indeterminate state right now, I've been distracted by another issue. It might work in your scenario but that has not been tested. I am not sure how functional it is for client / ATS connections. The clustering issue means that cluster communications require IPv4. It is independent of using IPv6 for client / ATS / server connections. The main issue blocking right now is me getting some other issues off my plate. Tuesday, January 3, 2012, 8:15:27 AM, you wrote: > Could anybody tell me the status of IPv6 support in ATS? I'm mainly > interested in terminating IPv6 on the ATS servers, and talk IPv4 towards > the backend servers > Is it fully functional for pure HTTP between client and ATS in reverse > proxy mode ? > Can we use ATS for terminating SSL on IPv6, or do we need to use > separate SSL terminator like Pound or similar? > What does it mean that "IPv6 support for clustering" (TS-990) isn't > fixed yet? Can't we use clustering and IPv6 together yet ? > Other issues blocking the usage of ATS for an IPv6 reverse proxy ? > -jf