Il giorno mer, 20/12/2006 alle 07.36 +0000, Trent Lloyd ha scritto: So the way to fix the problems with an upcoming technology is to supress > it? Thats silly.. Disabling it by default out of the box also does not > aid adoption. > Well, I never liked to be pushed to early adoption of a technology for my everyday work. This is just lying about its stability or well-tested-ness. I don't expect free software to adopt strategies of early-adoption, I can accept that mobile phone companies or processor manufacturers do this, but not a distribution which should be designed for stability, to work well *and* to be customizable, so that i can turn on ipv6 if I find it's better. You can even put a checkbox in the network configuration tool, but I expect the default settings to be maximum safety, not maximum features.
> As far as I can see, this is a limited issue to those with "broken" > routers, probably 98% of devices on the market have no problems with > this. > > The observation that one user in my situation can make about ubuntu these days is that "internet is slow". This is the observation that I made on windows 98, seven years ago, and it was embarassing for microsoft. Perhaps also on vista we will see an "internet is slow" problem. The machines on which you are installing ipv6 are home users machines, and you say it's a good idea to make them early adopters? Why? I would rather prefer to see providers adopting ipv6 first, and then home users. Perhaps I don't understand enough of networking to know the advantages of using ipv6, but by now it looks like I can do everything I want without using it. What are the advantages of using ipv6 at home at the moment? It seems in italy too, we have this problem, but I have a cheap home router so I don't know. > It is unfortunate that this is the case, the only solution that I would > personally like to see is some kind of attempt at detecting a "broken" > router, this could perhaps be achieved by doing a lookup on ubuntu.com > for IPv4 only, if that succeeds, try an any lookup and if that is met by > serious delays offer the ability to disable it, but I'd love to know > exactly how many users are affected by this issue and how much worth > there is in spending developer time on this (of course, I'm sure the > Ubuntu developers would *consider and discuss* accepting a proper well > formed and tested patch that did this) -- perhaps a simple FAQ entry > would suffice. > > I think it would be better to disable it until a better solution is found. I have seen bugs wait for months an important decision leaving users machines broken, when a quick fix was know, this is not a good idea in my opinion since you already have the update system, and can remove the quick fix and install the true patch anytime you want. You can't know how many people are affected by the problem because normally people do not even know anything about ipv6. Moreover, a FAQ entry does not help newbies that at most can insert a cd and click on "install", and I bet ubuntu wants to cover also this target - at least I hope so. If vista will bring world wide ipv6 adoption, we can wait for this and then turn on by default ipv6 in ubuntu, even with a stable release update if necessary (and I don't expect it will be so urgent). -- IPv6 should be disabled by default https://launchpad.net/bugs/24828 -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
