And you talked about Stuart Cheshire described a couple of IETFs ago,
Could you help to point out the link?
Sadly, I don't have it, but I suspect Stuart does, and I'm pretty sure he's
reading this.
Thanks, let's see whether he is going to talk here.
The gist of what he was saying is that if you have an IPv4 address that
looks okay, and an IPv6 address that looks okay, you can't assume that they
*are* okay, because there may be no route to the global internet on either
your IPv4 or your IPv6 link. So you must attempt to use both addresses,
not just one, and you must do it at the same time. Whichever one answers
first, you take.
It means that the new IP model will try host's multiple connections
each time as you suggested as well.
If you prefer either IPv4 or IPv6, and the transport you preferred happens
to be the one that was broken, a smart user will disable the one you've
preferred. That user will then advise his or her friends, for example,
that "IPv6 creates instability, so you should disable it." This impedes
deployment.
The unattended multiple interface situation is quite similar. I think the
attended case (a laptop with two or more network interfaces) is actually
better handled through user intervention, because the user has knowledge of
the physical situation that would be difficult to communicate to the
computer. But in the unattended case, you can get into the same sort of
"wrong learning" situation, where a smart but naive user who debugs a
network problem winds up learning a workaround that would impede
interoperability if everybody did it.
Interesting thoughing, workaround will impede deployment.
Thanks
-Hui
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf