On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:24 AM, Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> 
wrote:
> even if it's the equivalent
> of the beeping from a smoke detector whose battery is fading.

To which the typical response is to throw the damned thing through the window 
out of rage after it's been beeping for a couple of hours.

No, there are several viable solutions to this problem that don't involve 
beeping.   Beeping is not the right solution.

I would just like to point out, regarding the bufferbloat problem, that there 
are two classes of outcome if we hack around this problem instead of beeping.

The first class of outcome is that something works less well than it otherwise 
would have.   This is the bufferbloat problem.   If you have bufferbloat 
because you set up a bridge where ideally you shouldn't have, this is bad, and 
the customer will experience less than ideal outcomes.   But fundamentally, 
their network will function, particularly when loads are light.   And so this 
becomes a problem that they will either live with, or try to solve, but it is 
not an emergency.   It is a bad outcome, and the villain is clear: it's the ISP 
who gave out a /64.   FAQs on the net can cast the blame appropriately, and the 
home gateway can provide diagnostics that explain why the situation is 
suboptimal.

Contrast this with NAPTv6.   In this case, the network is _broken_.   End to 
end doesn't work.   If you are not connected directly to the border gateway, 
certain protocols simply will not work.   The result of this will be a general 
expectation on the part of applications vendors that end-to-end isn't something 
that can be counted upon.   And so we will have got nothing for all our effort 
in deploying IPv6.   We'll be back to NAT-inspired walled gardens.

Let's at least set our sights on the better outcome: the one that preserves end 
to end.   Yes, it's not ideal.   But the blame will be cast on the correct 
villain, the end-user will at least have a chance of a good outcome, and it 
won't needlessly break end-to-end.

_______________________________________________
homenet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet

Reply via email to