[182076] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Also Facebook (was: Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Fri Jul 10 00:53:26 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: "John Curran" <jcurran@arin.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:53:21 -0400
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <DE32D64A-59AB-40E2-8184-945EABB785DD@arin.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 21:48:06 -0400, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
> Both techniques indicate more than 20% of the US Internet users are
> connecting via IPv6.
Interesting method that's full of holes (and they know it), but it's data
nonetheless.
Globally, it's still ~4.5%. Within my own pool of providers, I'm ZERO for
5. (I've not pinged TWC-BC lately, 'tho. And no one has gotten back to me
that Earthlink has provided TWC with any prefixes, so us Earthlink cable
internet customers are still dark.)
> (They’ve also observing a significant performance
> improvement with IPv6 connected users over IPv4 connected...
IPv4 tends to be NAT'd and aggressively proxied. I also wouldn't rule out
v6 taking a different path, but that wouldn't explain the magnitude of
difference those slides would suggest. (not really readable via youtube)
