|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IPv6 vs IPv4 (Re: Sprint NOC? Are you awake now?)
Nenad Pudar wrote: Again my point is that your site (or any other that use the same dns for ipv4 and 6) may be "blackholed" by ipv6 (it is not the question primary about the quality ipv6 connction it is the fact that your ipv4 connection which may be excelant is blackholed with your ipv6 connection which may not be good and to me the most obvious solution is not to use the same dns name for both) for the people coming through 6bone or even for the majority of people not peering with Verio.It's a valid point, except that IPv4 could just as easily have had a problem. Network connectivity issues happen. Whether one uses IPv4 or IPv6 in the connection is not decided by the server, but by the client. If an IPv6 path is really bad, the client should switch to an IPv4 path and vice versa. If the software in use by the client does not make this easy, it is not the fault of the server. Perhaps a better solution than different DNS names for IP versions should be better client abilities. Is it unreasonable for the client system to detect that the IPv6 path seems unreasonable and quickly check to see if there is a better IPv4 path? Or perhaps the software utilizing the IP stack should allow the user to specify which method they'd like to utilize at that moment in time (ie, web-browser; view site with IPv4|IPv6). This would solve the problem you are indicating and not overcomplicate the server side which is working fine. People don't want to learn to type www.ipv6.example.com and www.ipv4.example.com. It makes much more sense to just change the software to choose which method it wants. Not that software vendors would incorporate such features. -Jack This the trace from 6 bone looking glass
|