|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Multi-6 [WAS: OT - Vint Cerf joins Google]
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:41:51 -0400 John Payne <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sep 12, 2005, at 6:58 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > > >> I'll be blunt. As long as that question is up in the air, none of > >> the major content providers are going to do anything serious in the > >> IPv6 arena. > > > > Well, I have no evidence of them doing anything with IPv6 anyway, so I > > don't know if this makes a difference. > > I have a very strong feeling that part of the lack of content providers > on IPv6 is due to the lack of multihoming. > No, I would say it is due to the lack of an audience that can _only_ be reached (or even _best_ be reached) using IPv6. Once the audience is there, the content providers will follow. Regards Marshall > Whilst this thread is open... perhaps someone can explain to me how > shim6 is as good as multihoming in the case of redundancy when one of > the links is down at the time of the initial request, so before any > shim-layer negotiation happens. > > I must be missing something, but there's a good chance that the > requester is going to have to wait for a timeout on their SYN packets > before failing over to another address to try. Or is the requester > supposed to send SYNs to all addresses for a hostname and race them > off? > >
|