Joel's iPad
On Jun 23, 2010, at 6:06 AM, Martin Rex <[email protected]> wrote: > 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. We have tcp syn cookies actually to protect against the impact of state generation on connect. As long as you as a client reply only to one syn/ack, everything is cool. > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
