On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 17:41:51 -0400 John Payne <john@sackheads.org> wrote:
On Sep 12, 2005, at 6:58 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
I'll be blunt. As long as that question is up in the air, none of the major content providers are going to do anything serious in the IPv6 arena.
Well, I have no evidence of them doing anything with IPv6 anyway, so I don't know if this makes a difference.
I have a very strong feeling that part of the lack of content providers on IPv6 is due to the lack of multihoming.
No, I would say it is due to the lack of an audience that can _only_ be reached (or even _best_ be reached) using IPv6. Once the audience is there, the content providers will follow. Regards Marshall
Whilst this thread is open... perhaps someone can explain to me how shim6 is as good as multihoming in the case of redundancy when one of the links is down at the time of the initial request, so before any shim-layer negotiation happens.
I must be missing something, but there's a good chance that the requester is going to have to wait for a timeout on their SYN packets before failing over to another address to try. Or is the requester supposed to send SYNs to all addresses for a hostname and race them off?