| reply to theboyk
Re: IPv6 beta Are you sure it's a mac thing and not a browser thing? I know some browsers were playing with different algorithms for choosing whether to be IPv4 or IPv6. It's considered a better user experience since IPv6 is a bastard child on most networks. Even on TekSavvy going with IPv6 can add 50ms to some round trips, due to crappier peering, peers, and routes in general. |
|
| I am in no authority to answer, but this thread adds some credence to that idea (and this is an old hint, back from 10.3 days)...
»hints.macworld.com/article.php?s···04026573
Edit: just tested multiple browsers, and results are the same as Safari (and on 2 of 6 reloads, IPv6 is used vs IPv4). Not definitive testing, but doesn't look like it's exclusively a browser issue. |
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to Mersault
said by Mersault:Are you sure it's a mac thing and not a browser thing? I know some browsers were playing with different algorithms for choosing whether to be IPv4 or IPv6. It's considered a better user experience since IPv6 is a bastard child on most networks. Even on TekSavvy going with IPv6 can add 50ms to some round trips, due to crappier peering, peers, and routes in general.
The specific implementation he is referring to is an OS X 10.7/Lion issue as Apple has implemented a Happy Eyeballs implementation right in the OS's v6 stack for all apps to use
as opposed to built into the browser like Chrome/Firefox 10 and up. |
|
|
|
brad
join:2007-09-06
Etobicoke, ON | reply to theboyk
said by theboyk:I am in no authority to answer, but this thread adds some credence to that idea (and this is an old hint, back from 10.3 days)...
»hints.macworld.com/article.php?s···04026573
Edit: just tested multiple browsers, and results are the same as Safari (and on 2 of 6 reloads, IPv6 is used vs IPv4). Not definitive testing, but doesn't look like it's exclusively a browser issue.
That's another issue. Older OS X releases had other bugs with the resolver. For example anything older than 10.6.8 had a bug that prevents OS X from being used on a v6-only network as the resolver will randomly return a v4 address for a site that has a AAAA record. |
|
| reply to brad
Yeah, doing happy eyeballs on the stack sounds like something Apple would do. And honestly, I don't see a problem with it. If my IPv6 connectivity is crappy I really would rather have my stuff go over IPv4. I like IPv6, but I don't want to have to put up with a slow and unresponsive internet for it.
ICMP (default options, 10 packets) to my colo in Seattle:
IPv4: round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 63.192/63.759/64.550/0.393 ms
IPv6: round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 78.003/78.432/78.708/0.194 ms
ICMP (default options, 10 packets) to my colo in Dallas:
IPv4: round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 40.789/41.073/41.411/0.196 ms
IPv6: round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 55.062/55.619/56.070/0.285 ms
ICMP (default options, 10 packets) from Dallas to Seattle colos:
IPv4: round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 48.486/48.674/48.939/0.150 ms
IPv6: round-trip min/avg/max/std-dev = 86.967/87.462/88.387/0.465 ms
The real problem isn't a happy eyeballs algorithm implemented on the network stack, it's that IPv6 transit is so terrible these days. |
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| My preference: Apple implements the way everyone else does so it's predictable. At that point, after June 6th if Youtube performance is poor we can start complaining to TSI that they need better V6 peering to Youtube, for example.
This is really the only way V6 is going to get rolled out and done so with good performance. Falling back on V4 every time V6 is a little slow will just drag this out. |
|
| You're making the assumption that Apple cares about IPv6. They don't. They aren't hostile to it or anything, it's just that IPv4 vs. IPv6 is totally irrelevant to their goals. They want their customers to have the best experience possible so that they keep coming back and buying more Apple products. There is a reason for the existence of Apple "fanboys" and it has very much to do with Apple's understanding of this. Apple is generally at their best when they're technology agnostic. Apple will be quite happy when after June 6th someone on Windows or Linux is struggling with a stuttering Youtube and the Mac user turns and says "it's working fine here". They will consider that a success.
It's up to the networking guys to make sure that the successful connections are over IPv6. It's not Apple's responsibility. |
|
