3 ms·
I have the opposite experience when it comes to availability. I sell some software that runs on servers, and we used to get so many tickets that came down to t
by regecks 7y ago
I have the opposite experience when it comes to availability.
I sell some software that runs on servers, and we used to get so many tickets that came down to the server's IPv6 transit being busted in sometimes obvious, sometimes subtle ways. And then we have to fight with their NOC to convince them something is broken.
IPv6 is an afterthought in many networks. There is less peering, less monitoring, less users overall to uncover issues.
It got so tedious to deal with that support burn that I just changed our software to not dual-stack any of its outgoing connections. Not heard a peep since.
- xfalcox 7y agoDoes the software runs well under heavy CGNAT? Because that is where we are going if everyone follows you.
- seppel 7y agoThe whole problem with ipv6 is that earlier adaptors have not much advantages (while still having to support ipv4 anyway) whereas late adaptors will have it much easier (better ecosystems, much less bugs anywhere else, problems are documented and well understood, infrastructure is tested, etc.). The incentives from the business side are just plain wrong. They can change when CGNAT causes problems. But they don't as long as other stuff is more important.
- saurik 7y agoWhat is the concrete problem you envision from "heavy CGNAT"?