3 ms·

The article is way too long for the message it tried to convey. Whatever that message was, I didn't get it. Related to this topic: IF IPv6 was a drop-in replac

by xiwenc 6y ago

The article is way too long for the message it tried to convey. Whatever that message was, I didn't get it. Related to this topic: IF IPv6 was a drop-in replacement for IPv4 then I think the adoption would be much better today. For instance from an end-user (residential use-case), I should be able to upgrade my network equipment (modem, switches, routers) over time and each one of them should work with IPv6 when possible transparently independently. It's possible that one might not reap the benefits on ipv6 immediately but over time (gradually) we should.

JoBrad 6y ago
Counterpoint: Stephen Fry’s voice suddenly began narrating this entire for me around the third sentence. This probably biased everything else for me, but in my opinion, it’s exceedingly rare to find ~a complex~ any topic in IT discussed ~in depth~ at all in such well-written language as this post contains. I honestly don’t care if they were completely wrong; their tone invited thought and discussion (which is probably one reason it’s been posted several times, with decent discussion, to boot).
ignoramous 6y ago
> Whatever that message was, I didn't get it. You might want to read this (rather long) follow up: https://tailscale.com/blog/two-internets-both-flakey/ https://tailscale.com/blog/two-internets-both-flakey/ Important bits (paraphrased): > Avery’s Laws of Wifi Reliability (mostly a paraphrasing of a trivial subset of CAP theorem): > Rule #1 ("a OR b", success compounds and failure rates drop): if you have two wifi router brands that work with 90% of client devices, and your device has a problem with one of them, replacing the wifi router brand will fix the problem 90% of the time. Thus, an ISP offering both wifi routers has a [1 - (10% x 10%)] = 99% chance of eventual success* > Rule #2 ("a AND b", failure compounds and success drops): if you’re running two wifi routers at once (say, a primary router and an extender), and both of them work “correctly” for about 90% of the time each day, the chance that your network has no problems all day is 81%. > My claim is that the "choose between two internets [IPv4, IPv6]" problem is the same as the "choose between two flakey wifi routers on the same SSID" problem (Rule #2). We should not be surprised that the combined system is less reliable. > The World in Which IPv6 was a Good Design: mobile IP. That is, the ability for your connections to keep going even if you hop between IP addresses. If you had IP mobility, then you could migrate connections between your two internets in real time, based on live quality feedback. You could send the same packets over both links and see which ones work better. If you picked one link and it suddenly stopped, you could retransmit packets on the other link and pick up where you left off. Your precise heuristic wouldn’t even matter that much, as long as it tries both ways eventually. > If you had IP mobility, then you could convert the “a AND b” scenario (failure compounds) into the “a OR b” scenario (success compounds).
fulafel 6y ago
> I should be able to upgrade my network equipment (modem, switches, routers) over time and each one of them should work with IPv6 when possible transparently independently. Good news: this describes current reality. (Your ISP needs to do their bit of course too)

by xiwenc 6y ago

JoBrad 6y ago

Counterpoint: Stephen Fry’s voice suddenly began narrating this entire for me around the third sentence. This probably biased everything else for me, but in my opinion, it’s exceedingly rare to find ~a complex~ any topic in IT discussed ~in depth~ at all in such well-written language as this post contains. I honestly don’t care if they were completely wrong; their tone invited thought and discussion (which is probably one reason it’s been posted several times, with decent discussion, to boot).

ignoramous 6y ago

> Whatever that message was, I didn't get it. You might want to read this (rather long) follow up: https://tailscale.com/blog/two-internets-both-flakey/ https://tailscale.com/blog/two-internets-both-flakey/ Important bits (paraphrased): > Avery’s Laws of Wifi Reliability (mostly a paraphrasing of a trivial subset of CAP theorem): > Rule #1 ("a OR b", success compounds and failure rates drop): if you have two wifi router brands that work with 90% of client devices, and your device has a problem with one of them, replacing the wifi router brand will fix the problem 90% of the time. Thus, an ISP offering both wifi routers has a [1 - (10% x 10%)] = 99% chance of eventual success* > Rule #2 ("a AND b", failure compounds and success drops): if you’re running two wifi routers at once (say, a primary router and an extender), and both of them work “correctly” for about 90% of the time each day, the chance that your network has no problems all day is 81%. > My claim is that the "choose between two internets [IPv4, IPv6]" problem is the same as the "choose between two flakey wifi routers on the same SSID" problem (Rule #2). We should not be surprised that the combined system is less reliable. > The World in Which IPv6 was a Good Design: mobile IP. That is, the ability for your connections to keep going even if you hop between IP addresses. If you had IP mobility, then you could migrate connections between your two internets in real time, based on live quality feedback. You could send the same packets over both links and see which ones work better. If you picked one link and it suddenly stopped, you could retransmit packets on the other link and pick up where you left off. Your precise heuristic wouldn’t even matter that much, as long as it tries both ways eventually. > If you had IP mobility, then you could convert the “a AND b” scenario (failure compounds) into the “a OR b” scenario (success compounds).

fulafel 6y ago

> I should be able to upgrade my network equipment (modem, switches, routers) over time and each one of them should work with IPv6 when possible transparently independently. Good news: this describes current reality. (Your ISP needs to do their bit of course too)