David Conrad wrote:
On Jun 18, 2010, at 7:21 PM, Martin Rex wrote:
What you described is a client with a pretty selfish attitude
that doesn't care about network, servers and the other clients
put into code.
Well, no. What I described was my understanding of a proposal to
facilitate transition that comes with some benefits and some costs.
If nothing else, given the truly inspirational amount of crap on the
Internet, I find it a bit difficult to get worked up about a few
additional packets at communication initiation that are actually beneficial.
What you described results in a negative incentive for servers to
become accessible under IPv6 as an alternative to IPv4. That is a real
problem. If a large number of clients would follow your proposed
strategy, ever server that announces an IPv6 address gets hit by
twice the amount of connection requests, half of them being killed
prenatal or during infancy.
If IPv6 connectivity is still bad, then the connection request will
not reach the server and the server will not notice. But it is a clear
goal to considerably improve on IPv6 connectivity in near term.
So the problem this selfish client-side hack addresses is going to
become worse for the servers over time.
I wonder at what point clients with a selfish attitude will stop
optimizing for their own interest alone. The largest effort for
client apps is to implement the parallel connection handling at
all. Using it for parallel IPv4 connects and not only IPv4+IPv6
comes essentially for free. For typical HTTP-style protocols
with small app-requests, sending the client requests in paralell
would also be "cheap" for the client. Deciding which connection
to retain based on which one yields the fastest server reply
is going to improve the "user experience" even more. But the
more it seems to "improve" for the client, the worse it gets
for the server, the network and all the other clients.
The concept works only as long as very few individuals try to
get an unfair advantage over the rest. But it definitely is
doomed if EVERYONE, or even a larger number of people would
practice this.
We seem to be talking about different things.
At the abstract level, it is exactly the same thing.
When a project is falling behind schedule there are two things
that the responsible manager could do:
- ask for more frequent status reports
- ask the team what he could do to help them getting it done
One of them is inconsiderate, ineffective and popular.
-Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf