On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 8:05 PM, Joe Abley <<a href="mailto:jabley@ca.afilias.info">jabley@ca.afilias.info</a>> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
On 20 Mar 2008, at 15:59 , Steve Wilcox wrote:<br>
<br>
> What is the advantage to take a v4 client accessing a v4 service and<br>
> then go and drop an asymmetric mtu reduced v6 tunnel in the middle<br>
> anyway?<br>
<br>
</div>That's a good question for <a href="http://www.google.com" target="_blank">www.google.com</a>. </blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Another question is: if you assume that v4 clients are going to try<br>
and kill the user's experience by tunnelling requests over v6 before<br>
falling back to v4, is it better for that fallback to happen quickly,<br>
or not at all?</blockquote><div><br>If you have a choice between "always works" and "may randomly failure in weird ways" .. in the real world the answer is obvious...<br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Neither of these questions are especially pertinent for<br>
<a href="http://ipv6.google.com" target="_blank">ipv6.google.com</a>, though, since (AIUI) you can't reach that over v4 (at<br>
least, the DNS gives no clues as to how to do so).</blockquote><div><br>ipv6 has only AAAA records and is imho probably more useful that way for now, there are various mixed v4/v6 sites out there tho if you want to test anything..<br>
</div><br>However if either www or ipv6 were to have both A and AAAA then we get back to the matter in hand that is which protocol to use, and what decision to make on selecting protocol, failing etc..<br><br>Steve<br></div>
<br>-- <br>Global Infrastructure<br>Google Inc.