Sorry if I'm veering off on a tangent or repeating things here, I only just got added to this list a short while ago but was asked to convey my concerns here.

While this has been discussed for some time, it seems as though the announcement that this is getting turned on was only made just recently; the coverage on January 16th John refers to doesn't seem to mention when this was going to be deployed, and I don't recall any mention on-wiki of IPv6 since then. For such a potentially major change, five day's notice is simply not enough for the entire community to digest. As it is, I still don't see any mention of this change on's Technical or Miscellaneous Village Pump, nor either Administrator's Noticeboard, the common announcement locations for such changes.

My second, and more pressing concern, is how well this will work. Speaking quite frankly, the development team has a bit of a bad habit of deploying something on Labs or the test wiki or whatever, deciding it works, and then deploying it straight to Wikipedia and the other public WMF sites. Unfortunately when they do so, hell breaks loose because all sorts of problems crop up - bugs that didn't crop up because the test wiki receives far less traffic than Wikipedia, issues with the interface that weren't addressed now cause problems because the users of Wikipedia don't use the test wiki, and it takes weeks for the issues to get fixed and/or for the community to adjust to the changes. Considering the traffic Wikipedia receives (it's the 5th most popular website in the world, after all), it seems remarkably inappropriate to treat it as a beta testing ground.

I'm very concerned that this is what's going to happen with the IPv6 change - something major is going to fail, and the wiki will become inaccessible, or some major security feature (blocking or protection, for example) will be rendered inoperable, leaving the wikis vulnerable to attack from all fronts. The latter situation seems to be more likely based on past issues, and unfortunately more problematic; once these issues get noted, it'll take only minutes for /b/, GNAA, and a long list of other vandals to figure it out and launch a full-scale attack that'll take weeks to clean up.

Can we receive some sort of assurance from the development team that the IPv6 system has been fully stress-tested, at a level comparable to what Wikipedia and the other wikis may face, and that all extensions used by the wikis were part of this test? If such an assurance cannot be made before June 6th, can the deployment of this update be delayed until that testing can be completed? For such a major website, I feel that consistent operation is more important than adhering to the latest standards.


On 6/1/2012 9:17 PM, George Herbert wrote:
I've been a little busy this spring, but I am interested in the IPv6
transition (at work, too) and missed this here as well.

I don't object as Anne is here, but I'm not doing the work she's doing
on project either.


On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:35 PM, John<>  wrote:
Multiple sign posts January 17 this year. There was also a May 2011
foundation announcement along with countless other notes

On Friday, June 1, 2012, Risker wrote:

I've got about 18 months worth of Wikitech-L in my archives, and there are
two threads that talk about IPv6; one from March, that didn't provide a lot
of information, and this one. There may be others, but they're not popping
up on my search.

Forgive me for failing to read this week's signpost from cover to cover
yet; it refers to the previous coverage from June 2011, and quotes Erik
Moeller from some unknown and unspecified source.  I don't know where he
told "the community" that. Do you?


On 1 June 2012 20:10, John<<javascript:;>>

Wow Risker, you obviously don't read any mailing lists/ blogs or sign
posts. I just did a quick search of my email records for wiki tech and
the first result that I see is from July 2007. Almost 5 years ago, I also
remember a big push last year about this same time for ipv6.

On Friday, June 1, 2012, Risker wrote:

Indeed, a long time. Discussed on Mediawiki and bugzilla; it's not even
discussed on Wikitech-L.  Neither of which 99.99999% of users,
many volunteer developers, have time to follow.  This is not just a
technical change, it's a cultural one.

I've long stood up for the Engineering Department when it is making
that have only minor effects on the public face of the project; I know
sometimes users can be hyperactive about minor points.  But this isn't
minor point.  I'd compare it to Vector - something that there was
active communication about throughout its development cycle, with lots
outreach to volunteer developers and to the community, and
test things out.

I can't stand up for them this time, though. It's not even discussed
on Mediawiki, and is mostly in passing on the Roadmap.[1]  And the few
community-based questions that have come up, specifically on Erik's
userpage, have not been given the courtesy of a reply.



On 1 June 2012 19:35, David 

On 2 June 2012 00:08, Risker<<javascript:;><javascript:;>>
Fully enabling IPv6 has been coming a *long* time - over a year, with
months of planning and work before even that - as Erik's first
in this thread notes, and it was hardly a secret. Your objections may
be entirely too late - it is vanishingly unlikely that two years'
effort will suddenly be thrown away. Were you literally unaware until
now that this was in the works?

- d.

Wikimedia-l mailing list<javascript:;>  <javascript:;>
Wikimedia-l mailing list<javascript:;>  <javascript:;>

Wikimedia-l mailing list<javascript:;>

Wikimedia-l mailing list<javascript:;>

Wikimedia-l mailing list

Wikimedia-l mailing list

Reply via email to