I'm working in China telecom. End users' experience is the uppermost important for us, either is over IPv4 or IPv6. People have fears on IPv6 transition because they are not sure of IPv6 performance. Actually we have received user's complains when IPv6 was deployed. IPv6-only is attractive，but it will take long time. In the early stage of dual-stack deployment, we can not expect the IPv6 has matched performance with IPv4. Many countries and regions still in early develpment shown in APNIC's global IPv6 performance monitoring (stats.labs.apnic.net/v6perf). NHE is a promising solution to enable network operator to provide their clients with better connectivity in dual-stack, which will also be helpful to SP/CPs. In addition, IPv6 situation in one region will persistent for longer period compared to the network dynamics. It will be easier to handle. Chongfeng Xie
xiechf....@chinatelecom.cn From: George Michaelson Date: 2018-09-26 10:58 To: dnsop WG CC: <v6...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [v6ops] [DNSOP] New Version Notification for draft-v6ops-xie-network-happyeyeballs-00.txt I have said before, but don't know if I still adhere to it, but anyways, here's a question: How *long* do people think a biassing mechanism like HE is a good idea? * is it a good idea *forever* * or is it a transition path mechanism which has an end-of-life? * how do we know, when its at end-of-life? I used to love HE. I now have a sense, I'm more neutral. Maybe, we actually don't want modified, better happy eyeballs, because we want simpler, more deterministic network stack outcomes with less bias hooks? I barely register if I an on v4 any more. I assume I'm on 6 on many networks. This is as an end-user. I guess if I am really an end user, this belief I understand TCP and UDP is false, and I should stop worrying (as an end user) On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 12:49 PM Davey Song <songlinj...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> But in the general case the network cannot. >> Think host multi-homing. > > > Yes or no. > > Generally speaking the races of IPv6 and IPv4 connections on both network and > client are going to be suffered by netowrk dynamics, including Multi-homing, > route flaps, roaming, or other network falilures. Extremely, a client can get > a better IPv6 connection in one second (when IPv6 win the race), and lose it > in next second. In such case, more sophisticated measurement should be > done(on client or network) , for a longer period, on statistics of RTT and > Failure rate, or combinations of them. But in IMHO, the assumption of HE is > relatively stable network for short exchange connections. The dynamics exits > but relatively rare or no notable impact on HE. So I see no such discussion > in RFC8035. > > Davey > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop _______________________________________________ v6ops mailing list v6...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
