On killing IPv6 transition mechanisms

[Jeroen Massar]

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
[..]
> Most if not all the large content providers have multiple servers
> behind a load balancer.

The problem is that with 6to4 the user generally does not even come to
that point.

The google folks can tell you better what their motives are for not
enabling IPv6 without the whitelist, but there

For that matter F5's BIG-IP boxes have been doing IPv6 already for
several years and quite happily, ask the www.bit.nl folks and various
others of their customers ;)

[..]
> Dual-stacking the host is not needed to dual stack the site.

The problem with upgrading a site is not so much stuff an IPv6 enabled
proxy/loadbalancer in front of it, the problem generally is the fact
that folks tend to store those nasty things called IP addresses and that
suddenly you have very long ones.

> Of course, I should not assume to tell content providers how to
> run their businesses, if they want to do it the bass-ackwards way
> that's their right. :-)

Backwards would be dedicating a pool of boxes and connecting them
directly to the Internet while you can just use the same methods you
already use for IPv4 just for IPv6...

[..]
>> (and no, not even I pretend that the above is scientific, but users
>> shouldn't search for "disable ipv6" at all. ;-))
> 
> Only the "power" users are going to bother digging that out

Must be a lot of "power users" in this world then ;)
Google/Bing/Yahoo! for it, there are lots of people who have problems
with the fact that their OS of choice enables IPv6 per default and stuff
start breaking due to either broken connectivity (6to4/Teredo) or even
native being broken (though if the ISP turned it on, then heck they
probably can fix it too ;) or broken DNS (which IHMO is a worse problem).

If you earn say a million a day, and you loose 0.01% of that, well, then
you know how much money you are missing every year. And money hurts.

And do realize that Windows Vista/Seven come with IPv6 per default. XP
can do it too. And more importantly: there are utilities (utorrent to
name a famous one) who enable IPv6 per default et voila, you are broken.
The user does not know, but they will notice.

> Unfortunately this is all part of educating the consumer about
> what constitutes a decent ISP service and what doesn't.

Nothing to do with the consumer, they didn't do a thing.
The ISP will get the complaints though that service X is unreachable.

> The fact of the matter though is that it really only matters
> to get the center of the bell-curve users on IPv6.  Once that
> happens the power users will have to get on it also.

True power users know what they do, they don't have issues.

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/attachments/20100315/2af14620/attachment-0001.bin