4 ms·

How Google could kick start IPv6

5 points by bensummers 16y ago

moe 16y ago
That's an intriguing idea - but sadly it's also straight from the "what if the world cared!"-bucket. Google will not risk their competitive edge in search for the cause of IPv6. Joe Sixpack wants good search results. He doesn't want a bad site ranked over a good site only because the bad site was quicker to implement IPv6. Joe Sixpack doesn't even know what IPv6 is.
- cleverjake 16y ago
  How would they risking their edge? They take hundreds of things into account that are all left up to the websites themselves. This would simply be SEO.
zdw 16y ago
What's in it for them? I could think of a whole lot of other "good" things Google could reward for: - HTML/XHTML that is well formed and validates or has closed tags - Use of alt tags and other accessibility friendly features (beyond how these already benefit them) But I don't think they'd do any of this if it doesn't benefit them directly. Sure, they have cars that drive around on their own, but what is being proposed is messing with their core business - the "meat and potatoes" that makes them all the money. Until it causes them "pain" this seems unlikely. That said, from "force the issue" networking standpoint I think it's an awesomely great idea.
cleverjake 16y ago
This misses the point. Hosting companies aren't the ones that really need to switch to ivp6, its the ISPs. Most hosting companies have several thousand, if not hundred thousand IPs already owned by them, that are constantly turned over by users leaving and new users signing up. The push is on assuring that new customers at home that sign up have an IP address, especially in developing/new markets. Having an incentive for websites be IPv6 compliant would only push the focus to the wrong area of the issue.
wglb 16y ago
An interesting step it would be, but I am a little hazy on the details of how this would work. So Google ranks an IPV6 site slightly higher than the competition. Neat. But nobody can get to it because they are all IPV4. So that site needs to also show up in IPV4, since none of us are IPV6 yet. Is that the same site or a different one (presuming that the content is the same)? If it is the same one, then how does Google link these together? So this doesn't motivate me to motivate my ISP to go IPv6 since I can still see the site in IPV4. If there is a magic bullet to get everybody over the IPv6, I don't think this is the one. To more fully bake this proposal, perhaps a review of the DJB ipv6 mess article will help. I am increasingly wondering if it isn't like changing which side of the road everybody drives on. Not likely to work well unless it all happens at once.

5 points by bensummers 16y ago

moe 16y ago

That's an intriguing idea - but sadly it's also straight from the "what if the world cared!"-bucket. Google will not risk their competitive edge in search for the cause of IPv6. Joe Sixpack wants good search results. He doesn't want a bad site ranked over a good site only because the bad site was quicker to implement IPv6. Joe Sixpack doesn't even know what IPv6 is.

cleverjake 16y ago
How would they risking their edge? They take hundreds of things into account that are all left up to the websites themselves. This would simply be SEO.

zdw 16y ago

What's in it for them? I could think of a whole lot of other "good" things Google could reward for: - HTML/XHTML that is well formed and validates or has closed tags - Use of alt tags and other accessibility friendly features (beyond how these already benefit them) But I don't think they'd do any of this if it doesn't benefit them directly. Sure, they have cars that drive around on their own, but what is being proposed is messing with their core business - the "meat and potatoes" that makes them all the money. Until it causes them "pain" this seems unlikely. That said, from "force the issue" networking standpoint I think it's an awesomely great idea.

cleverjake 16y ago

This misses the point. Hosting companies aren't the ones that really need to switch to ivp6, its the ISPs. Most hosting companies have several thousand, if not hundred thousand IPs already owned by them, that are constantly turned over by users leaving and new users signing up. The push is on assuring that new customers at home that sign up have an IP address, especially in developing/new markets. Having an incentive for websites be IPv6 compliant would only push the focus to the wrong area of the issue.

wglb 16y ago

An interesting step it would be, but I am a little hazy on the details of how this would work. So Google ranks an IPV6 site slightly higher than the competition. Neat. But nobody can get to it because they are all IPV4. So that site needs to also show up in IPV4, since none of us are IPV6 yet. Is that the same site or a different one (presuming that the content is the same)? If it is the same one, then how does Google link these together? So this doesn't motivate me to motivate my ISP to go IPv6 since I can still see the site in IPV4. If there is a magic bullet to get everybody over the IPv6, I don't think this is the one. To more fully bake this proposal, perhaps a review of the DJB ipv6 mess article will help. I am increasingly wondering if it isn't like changing which side of the road everybody drives on. Not likely to work well unless it all happens at once.