Slow WiFi with Android Marshmallow & IPv6?

[Bjørn Mork]

Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> writes:
> On 4/26/2016 1:37 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
>> But let's face it: name-server config is not something that interests a
>> large group of end users. Any feature which is not part of the default
>> OS installation is not worth considering at all.
>
> is that a fact?  I suppose you don't use SSH then to access your
> command line servers and devices. <eyeroll>

I meant to imply a name-server config context.  I.e.

  Any name-server config related feature which is not part of the
  default OS installation is not worth considering at all.

and I will stand by that.

I thought we were discssing issues which are relevant for ISPs
configuring end user CPEs. Which has absolutely nothing to do with what
you or I do on the devices we manage. It doesn't matter much what
joe-anal-it-department-guy does to make Windows work on his DHCPv6 free
network either. If you manage both the CPE and the end devices, then
that's a different game. You could configure static name-servers if you
like

The challenge is for an ISP managing home user CPEs, to make all random
unmanaged end user devices Just Work(tm).  Pointing to software which
the end user *could* install is futile.  You have to cope with whatever
is the default on those devices.  Meaning that there is no RFC6106
support on Windows.  Or DHCPv6 support on Android.  And I really don't
see any point in nagging about either anymore.  It's not like it would
help much if new Windows or Android versions suddenly supported the
other protocol.  End users don't upgrade.  In the Android case, they
often don't even have the option.

But we could discuss whether it currently makes sense to support DNS
queries over IPv6 at all. Doubling the number of resolver addresses is
not necessarily good.  I believe most consider 2 addresses optimal in
IPv4 only deployments.  Resolver libraries are notorioulsy bad at
fail-over, so there isn't really any point in more that that.  And you'd
better make both addresses always be up and responding. Adding 2 more
addresses is only adding trouble.  So why do we do that?  To be nice to
all the IPv6 only devices out there?  Right...


Bjørn