[194347] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CGNAT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Radu-Adrian Feurdean)
Mon Apr 10 06:11:36 2017
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: "Radu-Adrian Feurdean" <nanog@radu-adrian.feurdean.net>
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>, Max Tulyev <maxtul@netassist.ua>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 12:11:32 +0200
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1704072002540.27978@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On Fri, Apr 7, 2017, at 20:03, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Max Tulyev wrote:
>
> > BTW, does somebody check how implementing a native IPv6 decrease actual
> > load of CGNAT?
>
> Reports are that 30-50% of traffic will be IPv6 when you enable dual
> stack. This would be traffic that will not traverse your CGNAT.
My data on customers supposed to be 100% dual-stack (unless they
explicitely disable IPv6 on their side, which some of them do) says 25%
on best days. It used to be up to 35% in late 2015.
For reason unknown, it was going slightly down during 2016, with a
sudden extra decrease in january this year.
