On 17 Jun 2010, at 13:30, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > On 06/17/2010 01:38 PM, Sabahattin Gucukoglu wrote: >> Just in case someone here wants to take sides, have a look at this thread on >> the IPv6 discussion list at Apple: >> http://lists.apple.com/archives/ipv6-dev/2010/Jun/msg00000.html >> (the thread actually goes back earlier than that, but I can't be bothered >> going looking for it because I can't stand that awful PiperMail interface) > > What I've never understood is why (almost) everyone tries addresses in > sequence instead of in parallel. > > Even applications that routinely open two or more concurrent connections to > the server first try IPvX, then wait many seconds, then try IPvY. Why not try > both in parallel and use whatever address answers first?
It's Apple we're talking about here. Have a look at this for some nasty surprises: http://www.fix6.net/archives/2010/03/06/the-strange-behavior-of-apples-mdnsresponder/ Admittedly this is just for DNS, but I think it illustrates the general problem, you can't win, you can't break even, and you can't even quit the game with this one. Cheers, Sabahattin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
