> Given the problem you point out with this particular host, it's quite > ironic, isn't it? What about getting them to fix it? > ... > Maybe it's because people complain on the BTS that IPv6 is preferred > over IPv4 by default and this causes issues with ftp.ie.debian.org > instead of telling the folks at Heanet about it? > ... > Or because people who should know better just shrug at it thinking > "it's just v6, v4 works, I'll got with that" instead of looking at the > issue and sending a quick mail to the people in charge?
I'm sorry, but the "people need to whine more" solution does not scale. (What makes you think I have not reported these issues?) > According to their own study, "many IPv6-enabled clients" is > actually a minority. What is your point? No one is claiming a majority. The point is we should strive to not break ANYTHING. That is how transitions are encouraged: when you can honestly tell people that if they turn on IPv6 they will break *nothing*. That *no* clients will suffer. That *no one* will complain. Not that "only a minority" will have problems. > $ ping -c2 www.google.com > ... time=10.3 ms > ... time=10.3 ms > $ ping6 -c2 www.google.com > ... time=12.3 ms > ... time=12.0 ms Given the limited data you provide, it would appear that you would be better off using IPv4 for communicating with this particular host. You might say that someone who is not emotional about the situation, and cares only about network performance, would in this case "prefer" IPv4 over IPv6. Correct? --Barak. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org