On 21 Jul 2011, at 19:32, Josh Graessley wrote:
> Most users that aren't on this list don't care if they connect over IPv4 or IPv6. They just care that they connect. The code in CF and NS aims to make sure the user always gets a connection quickly. The code above also addresses issues where a AAAA response is never received (doesn't hold up connecting to IPv4) and issues where the user has some busted equipment that sends routing advertisements for a prefix even though the equipment has no way to route IPv6 traffic. The trade off is that it may be hard to predict whether a connection will occur over IPv6 or IPv4. If an option were added to prefer one address family over the other, it would need to indicate how much longer the user was willing to wait to get the address family of their choice.
I'm not sure this works for me. If we expect that IPv4 will degrade over time, doesn't it follow that the default should be a preference for IPv6 with a short timeout (I'd use 250 ms)? Otherwise Mac systems will contribute to the degradation as long as IPv4 continues to be faster, while not assisting IPv6 until the time comes for it to be preferable to an already intolerably slow IPv4. We shouldn't just penalise whichever is the slower. We do expect that tunnels and transition mechanisms will be penalised as well, even when it's not under user control (EG third-party broker, ISP-supplied 6rd prefix).
But then again, users are users.
Cheers,
Sabahattin
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Ipv6-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
