[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

"Programmers can't get IPv6 thus that is why they do not have IPv6 in their applications"....

On 2012-11-28 17:30 , david raistrick wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2012, Bj?rn Mork wrote:
>> Do you really want to run netowrking software written by someone
>> incapable of setting up a test network?  This doesn't have anything with
>> tunnel brokers or native access to do at all.
> So the software engineer should now -also- be responsible for, and
> capable of, recreating both the network as well as 3rd party systems
> that he/she has to code against?
> again focusing on just our last title release - 20+ 3rd party interfaces
> run by 6 different companies.   Is the software engineer really
> responsible for faking things like xbox live, PSN, facebook, twitter,
> google, etc on a test network?

Not for faking it, but in the case you mention it is very obvious that
the software engineer should be able to ask their network team to make
sure that they can access those API's if only for testing...

In IPv6 that goes the same way:
 - either ask the local network team to get it for you
 - do it yourself

Which might mean the person actually arranging it gets native or some
kind of tunnel.

And still, if you as a proper engineer where not able to test/add IPv6
code in the last 10++ years, then you did something very very wrong in
your job, the least of which is to file a ticket for IPv6 support in the
ticket tracking system so that one could state "I thought of it, company
did not want it".

Oh and remember: one can EASILY test this on a local network, link-local
works fine, and one can also set up ULA or heck fake addresses to test
this, or heck, loopback is also a great thing.
Yes, that does not cover all scenarios, but it does cover most basic