[172047] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 at 50% for VZW (Re: NAT IP and Google)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lee Howard)
Thu May 22 11:49:22 2014
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 11:49:14 -0400
From: Lee Howard <Lee@asgard.org>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>,
Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>, "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <CFA35BDB.D23C8%jason_livingood@cable.comcast.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 5/22/14 8:04 AM, "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>
wrote:
>On 5/21/14, 9:38 PM, "Jared Mauch" <jared@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>>On May 21, 2014, at 7:17 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Verizon Wireless is at 50% ipv6 penetration
>>
>>I suspect this would go up significantly if Twitter and Instagram would
>>IPv6 enable their services. Same for pintarest.
>
>+1
>We naturally focus a lot on network enablement here, but IMO it is a great
>time to focus on more web-based services embracing IPv6 with another June
>6 just around the corner. :-)
A side project I've been meaning to take on:
In his really useful listing of content providers' IPv6 support,
https://www.vyncke.org/ipv6status/ Eric Vyncke has added "CDN" to sites
using an identifiable CDN.
I've been meaning to write a script to pull those sites and CDNs, to
identify "bang for the buck" in CDN enablement. I know Akamai is
enormous, but if CloudFlare, Limelight, and a couple of hosting companies
were to dual-stack all of their customers, would it matter that Akamai and
Amazon weren't doing so yet? Or another way to look at it would be, who
would be the key players for a major content enablement day?
Lee
