[158271] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Big day for IPv6 - 1% native penetration
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ben Jencks)
Tue Nov 27 13:04:13 2012
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 13:03:03 -0500
From: Ben Jencks <ben@bjencks.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20121127161935.GC84087@ricotta.doit.wisc.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 11/27/2012 11:19 AM, Dale W. Carder wrote:
> Thus spake Dobbins, Roland (rdobbins@arbor.net) on Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 03:16:27PM +0000:
>>
>> On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:50 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>
>>> the cause is netflix and youtube, with a bit of help from fb and non-youtube gobble.
>>
>> Just because their users can reach popular content-rich/high-bandwidth endpoint sites via IPv6 *that they can also reach via IPv4* doesn't seem to provide much of an incentive in and of itself for IPv6 deployment.
>
> I would consider 40% offload from your expensive CGN to be incentive in and of itself.
Just a thought -- what percentage of flows is that 40% of traffic? Since
it's mostly video I'd assume the bytes/flow would be far higher than the
median.
If you can get a reasonably high percentage of flows on IPv6, not only
do take load off your CGN box, you can get higher users per public IPv4
address ratios and stretch your v4 allocation further.
No idea if the numbers work out to make this a useful effect in the
timeframe when it would be necessary, but it's a benefit I haven't heard
voiced before.
-Ben
