While I agree it’s still going to be a while before it becomes a critical issue, more and more environments are going IPv6 first with IPv4 as a NAT’ed service…
I think the mobile carriers are going to be the ones to really push adoption. > On Jan 22, 2016, at 7:53 PM, Constantine A. Murenin <muren...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On 21 January 2016 at 19:42, Matthew D. Hardeman <mharde...@ipifony.com> > wrote: >> An excellent point. Nobody would tolerate this in IPv4 land. Those >> disputes tended to end in days and weeks (sometimes months), but not years. >> >> That said, as IPv6 is finally gaining traction, I suspect we’ll be seeing >> less tolerance for this behavior. > > Nope. Most user-facing apps are in support of Happy Eyeballs. > > When Facebook's FB.ME was down on IPv6 just a short while ago in 2013, > it took DAYS for anyone to notice. > > http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2013-May/005571.html > > Lots of popular sites publish AAAA with non-reachable services all the > time, and still noone notices to this day. > > The old school command line tools are the only ones affected. One may > also notice it with `ssh -D` SOCKS5 proxying, but only if one's > browser doesn't decide to leak out hostname resolution and operate > directly with IPv4-addresses to start with, like Chrome does. > > Cheers, > Constantine.SU.
