The question that Matthew Kaufman proposed was specifically asking about app architecture deployments, so what Facebook is choosing to do is entirely germane. - Matt On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:43:27PM -0400, Todd Underwood wrote:
fb is not a 'cloud provider'.
it's orthogonal to the question.
t
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew@matthew.at> wrote:
On 6/1/2015 12:06 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
... Here’s the thing… In order to land IPv6 services without IPv6 support on the VM, you’re creating an environment where...
Let's hypothetically say that it is much easier for the cloud provider if they provide just a single choice within their network, but allow both v4 and v6 access from the outside via a translator (to whichever one isn't native internally).
Would you rather have: 1) An all-IPv6 network inside, so the hosts can all talk to each other over IPv6 without using (potentially overlapping copies of) RFC1918 space... but where very little of the open-source software you build your services on works at all, because it either doesn't support IPv6 or they put some IPv6 support in but it is always lagging behind and the bugs don't get fixed in a timely manner. Or,
Facebook selected IPv6-only as outlined above
http://blog.ipspace.net/2014/03/facebook-is-close-to-having-ipv6-only.html
2) An all-IPv4 network inside, with the annoying (but well-known) use of RFC1918 IPv4 space and all your software stacks just work as they always have, only now the fraction of users who have IPv6 can reach them over
IPv6
if they so choose (despite the connectivity often being worse than the IPv4 path) and the 2 people who are on IPv6-only networks can reach your services too.
Until all of the common stacks that people build upon, including distributed databases, cache layers, web accelerators, etc. all work *better* when the native environment is IPv6, everyone will be choosing #2.
And both #1 and #2 are cheaper and easier to manage that full dual-stack to every single host (because you pay all the cost of supporting v6 everywhere with none of the savings of not having to deal with the ever-increasing complexity of continuing to use v4)
Matthew Kaufman
-- Designing an effective undergrad CS degree is hard. It's no wonder so many ivy-league schools have more or less given up and turned into Java Certification shops. -- Steve Yegge, http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rich-programmer-food.html