From the dualstack-is-fun department...

[Cameron Byrne]

On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Martin Millnert <martin at millnert.se> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 23:31 -0800, Cameron Byrne wrote:
>> This also creates the ugly situation where customer calls help desk
>> saying website x is down, support person tries to get to website x,
>> and it works. Help desk says, nope "works for me" and the broken ipv6
>> access or dare I say ipv4 access is broken to the none-HE user but
>> works for the HE user. If the none he-user cannot easily convince
>> others that there is a problem, that is bad.
>
> Cameron, the below seems ~obvious to me in the scenario you describe:
> "[...]
> HD: What browser are you using?
> Cust: X
> HD: Well I am using Y v. Z [with HE implementation], try installing Y.
> You will need this one [to continue the debugging].
> [...]"
>

Even DHS/CERT has tried to get people to stop using IE because it is a
national security risk.  Yet, people use IE and many corporations
require IE(6!) for many things ... furthermore, many people just like
browser X.  I don't think this will be a very popular option.  But, i
understand your logic, it just does not fit with .... the reality of
people and browsers IMHO.

> A "possibility" help-desk side, however rough, "un-scalable" (ie,
> ISP-expensive) and sub-optimal. Given the complete problem scope we are
> facing I'm not sure what is going to be worse though:
>  13min latencies, bad customer experience and multiple support calls,
> vs. having a procedure to track down the root cause that HE/disabling
> ipv6 fixes. Support desks will need updated flow charts - "boo hoo" :)

I think our flow chart ends with pulling the battery out of the phone
and putting it back in.  And yes, every support call can be
reverse-engineered to help someone with a common problem with
methodical troubleshooting steps, but i do not believe that is how
helpdesks are run.  The troubleshooting logic tree is kept pretty
narrow since there are too many rabbit holes to peak in.

> ("I encourage all my competitors to give crappy customer support...")
>  And should this become widespread enough, eventually news media will
> start say that you have to use "Y version >= Z" to use the Internet...
>

I don't think anyone can sell that logic to the VP of Customer Care.
As i said, even the USA Department of Homeland Security (DHS) cannot
get people or companies or even the federal government to stop using
IE6.

> The above doesn't strike me entirely bad in itself.
>  Pain's going to hit somewhere for sure and there is no realistic
> one-stop solution for all problems, so we have to continue to expand the
> band-aid kit.
>
Agreed.  The low tolerance for pain is why we don't generally have
ipv6 deployed.

> HE connection success/fail statistics / logging and opt-in reporting
> somewhere would certainly be a nice addition as well (name the button
> "Make the Internet better..." or so :) )
>

Agreed. Maybe its a gadget/widget/app of some sort.  My only point is
we need to be cautious about providing different views of the world.
Nobody says HE is a panacea, but it might be an addictive morphine
that we use to numb the pain instead of taking the medicine (fixing v6
instead of treating it like a 2nd class protocol).

Perhaps there should be some wording in the draft that HE is not to be
used by default.  HE should be enabled manually by people who know
what it is, like a helpdesk tech trying to solve a customer's problem.
 Turning something on by default, including software upgrades, can
results in things like the 6to4 fiasco.  Well intentioned, as are all
the steps on the path to hell.

Cameron


> Regards,
> Martin
>
>