[107014] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: uTorrent, IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nathan Ward)
Wed Aug 20 00:42:43 2008
From: Nathan Ward <nanog@daork.net>
To: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080819183951.GC22115@cgi.jachomes.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:42:29 +1200
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 20/08/2008, at 6:39 AM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 04:56:33PM +1200, Nathan Ward wrote:
>> Sit up and pay attention, even if you don't now run IPv6, or even if
>> you don't ever intend to run IPv6. Your off-net bandwidth is going to
>> increase, unless you put some relays in. As a friend of mine just =20
>> said
>> to me: "Welcome to your v6-enabled transit network, whether you like
>> it or not ;-)".
>
> So you're saying Slashdot *lies*?
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=3D08/08/18/226228&from=3Dr=
ss
They don't intentionally lie, but the study they are reporting on is =20
uninformed.
For example:
"Our research looked at all IPv6 traffic=97both native and tunneled, =20
including Teredo, which encapsulates IPv4 traffic in UDP
datagrams using UDP port 3544. We found a peak of only 12 Mbps of =20
Teredo traffic, representing around 10 percent of the
I P protocol 41 traffic."
Teredo uses 3544/UDP to for Client<->Server communication. That is for =20=
relay discovery when needed, and the qualification procedure - not =20
much traffic. Client<->Relay communication MAY use 3544/UDP, Client<-=20
>Client communication MAY use 3544/UDP.
In my experience (packets I have been analysing in the last 24 hours =20
for example) suggests that not many actual data packets are on UDP/3544.
I'll get some exact numbers on that in a few hours if you like.
Also that report only includes data up until July 2008. uTorrent with =20=
Teredo and IPv6 stuff was released 9 August - which is the intention =20
for my original message.
--
Nathan Ward
