6 ms·

I won't be so brazen as to suggest I could have done any better, but the claim that never actually completing the upgrade was the only way is a bit too hand wav

I won't be so brazen as to suggest I could have done any better, but the claim that never actually completing the upgrade was the only way is a bit too hand wavy I think.

throw0101a 2y ago
> […] but the claim that never actually completing the upgrade was the only way is a bit too hand wavy I think. Is it accurate to think of it as an "upgrade" versus "addition"? It's not like HTTP 1.1 went away just because HTTP 3/QUIC came around. HTTP 3 may have certain useful features, but lots of folks do need/care about them and so may never activate it (at least on purpose, unless Apache/Nginx have them default-on). This thinking may not add much burden to the rest of the Internet for that protocol. Whereas not supporting IPv6 can add burdens to others: > Our [American Indian] tribal network started out IPv6, but soon learned we had to somehow support IPv4 only traffic. It took almost 11 months in order to get a small amount of IPv4 addresses allocated for this use. In fact there were only enough addresses to cover maybe 1% of population. So we were forced to create a very expensive proxy/translation server in order to support this traffic. > We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices. * https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s-2022-and-still-no-IPv6/m-p/854673/highlight/true#M35732 https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s... * Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624 Getting people to follow new standards and follow best practices can be more difficult than herding cats.

I won't be so brazen as to suggest I could have done any better, but the claim that never actually completing the upgrade was the only way is a bit too hand wavy I think.

throw0101a 2y ago

> […] but the claim that never actually completing the upgrade was the only way is a bit too hand wavy I think. Is it accurate to think of it as an "upgrade" versus "addition"? It's not like HTTP 1.1 went away just because HTTP 3/QUIC came around. HTTP 3 may have certain useful features, but lots of folks do need/care about them and so may never activate it (at least on purpose, unless Apache/Nginx have them default-on). This thinking may not add much burden to the rest of the Internet for that protocol. Whereas not supporting IPv6 can add burdens to others: > Our [American Indian] tribal network started out IPv6, but soon learned we had to somehow support IPv4 only traffic. It took almost 11 months in order to get a small amount of IPv4 addresses allocated for this use. In fact there were only enough addresses to cover maybe 1% of population. So we were forced to create a very expensive proxy/translation server in order to support this traffic. > We learned a very expensive lesson. 71% of the IPv4 traffic we were supporting was from ROKU devices. 9% coming from DishNetwork & DirectTV satellite tuners, 11% from HomeSecurity cameras and systems, and remaining 9% we replaced extremely outdated Point of Sale(POS) equipment. So we cut ROKU some slack three years ago by spending a little over $300k just to support their devices. * https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s-2022-and-still-no-IPv6/m-p/854673/highlight/true#M35732 https://community.roku.com/t5/Features-settings-updates/It-s... * Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35047624 Getting people to follow new standards and follow best practices can be more difficult than herding cats.