[Wikimedia-l] Update on IPv6

Sat Jun 2 03:04:51 UTC 2012

Sorry if I'm veering off on a tangent or repeating things here, I only 
just got added to this list a short while ago but was asked to convey my 
concerns here.

While this has been discussed for some time, it seems as though the 
announcement that this is getting turned on was only made just recently; 
the coverage on January 16th John refers to doesn't seem to mention when 
this was going to be deployed, and I don't recall any mention on-wiki of 
IPv6 since then. For such a potentially major change, five day's notice 
is simply not enough for the entire community to digest. As it is, I 
still don't see any mention of this change on en.wiki's Technical or 
Miscellaneous Village Pump, nor either Administrator's Noticeboard, the 
common announcement locations for such changes.

My second, and more pressing concern, is how well this will work. 
Speaking quite frankly, the development team has a bit of a bad habit of 
deploying something on Labs or the test wiki or whatever, deciding it 
works, and then deploying it straight to Wikipedia and the other public 
WMF sites. Unfortunately when they do so, hell breaks loose because all 
sorts of problems crop up - bugs that didn't crop up because the test 
wiki receives far less traffic than Wikipedia, issues with the interface 
that weren't addressed now cause problems because the users of Wikipedia 
don't use the test wiki, and it takes weeks for the issues to get fixed 
and/or for the community to adjust to the changes. Considering the 
traffic Wikipedia receives (it's the 5th most popular website in the 
world, after all), it seems remarkably inappropriate to treat it as a 
beta testing ground.

I'm very concerned that this is what's going to happen with the IPv6 
change - something major is going to fail, and the wiki will become 
inaccessible, or some major security feature (blocking or protection, 
for example) will be rendered inoperable, leaving the wikis vulnerable 
to attack from all fronts. The latter situation seems to be more likely 
based on past issues, and unfortunately more problematic; once these 
issues get noted, it'll take only minutes for /b/, GNAA, and a long list 
of other vandals to figure it out and launch a full-scale attack that'll 
take weeks to clean up.

Can we receive some sort of assurance from the development team that the 
IPv6 system has been fully stress-tested, at a level comparable to what 
Wikipedia and the other wikis may face, and that all extensions used by 
the wikis were part of this test? If such an assurance cannot be made 
before June 6th, can the deployment of this update be delayed until that 
testing can be completed? For such a major website, I feel that 
consistent operation is more important than adhering to the latest 
standards.

----
User:Hersfold
hersfoldwiki at gmail.com

On 6/1/2012 9:17 PM, George Herbert wrote:
> I've been a little busy this spring, but I am interested in the IPv6
> transition (at work, too) and missed this here as well.
>
> I don't object as Anne is here, but I'm not doing the work she's doing
> on project either.
>
>
> -george
>
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 5:35 PM, John<phoenixoverride at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Multiple sign posts January 17 this year. There was also a May 2011
>> foundation announcement along with countless other notes
>>
>> On Friday, June 1, 2012, Risker wrote:
>>
>>> I've got about 18 months worth of Wikitech-L in my archives, and there are
>>> two threads that talk about IPv6; one from March, that didn't provide a lot
>>> of information, and this one. There may be others, but they're not popping
>>> up on my search.
>>>
>>> Forgive me for failing to read this week's signpost from cover to cover
>>> yet; it refers to the previous coverage from June 2011, and quotes Erik
>>> Moeller from some unknown and unspecified source.  I don't know where he
>>> told "the community" that. Do you?
>>>
>>> Risker
>>>
>>> On 1 June 2012 20:10, John<phoenixoverride at gmail.com<javascript:;>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wow Risker, you obviously don't read any mailing lists/ blogs or sign
>>>> posts. I just did a quick search of my email records for wiki tech and
>>> ipv6
>>>> the first result that I see is from July 2007. Almost 5 years ago, I also
>>>> remember a big push last year about this same time for ipv6.
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, June 1, 2012, Risker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Indeed, a long time. Discussed on Mediawiki and bugzilla; it's not even
>>>>> discussed on Wikitech-L.  Neither of which 99.99999% of users,
>>> including
>>>>> many volunteer developers, have time to follow.  This is not just a
>>>>> technical change, it's a cultural one.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've long stood up for the Engineering Department when it is making
>>>> changes
>>>>> that have only minor effects on the public face of the project; I know
>>>> that
>>>>> sometimes users can be hyperactive about minor points.  But this isn't
>>> a
>>>>> minor point.  I'd compare it to Vector - something that there was
>>>> longterm,
>>>>> active communication about throughout its development cycle, with lots
>>> of
>>>>> outreach to volunteer developers and to the community, and
>>> opportunities
>>>> to
>>>>> test things out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't stand up for them this time, though. It's not even discussed
>>> well
>>>>> on Mediawiki, and is mostly in passing on the Roadmap.[1]  And the few
>>>>> community-based questions that have come up, specifically on Erik's
>>> meta
>>>>> userpage, have not been given the courtesy of a reply.
>>>>>
>>>>> Risker
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Roadmap
>>>>>
>>>>> On 1 June 2012 19:35, David Gerard<dgerard at gmail.com<javascript:;><javascript:;>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2 June 2012 00:08, Risker<risker.wp at gmail.com<javascript:;><javascript:;>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Fully enabling IPv6 has been coming a *long* time - over a year, with
>>>>>> months of planning and work before even that - as Erik's first
>>> message
>>>>>> in this thread notes, and it was hardly a secret. Your objections may
>>>>>> be entirely too late - it is vanishingly unlikely that two years'
>>>>>> effort will suddenly be thrown away. Were you literally unaware until
>>>>>> now that this was in the works?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - d.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org<javascript:;>  <javascript:;>
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org<javascript:;>  <javascript:;>
>>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org<javascript:;>
>>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org<javascript:;>
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>
>