Study of IPv6 Deployment

Jeroen Massar jeroen at
Tue Apr 28 04:06:06 CDT 2009

Elliott Karpilovsky wrote:
> Hello everyone. My name is Elliott Karpilovsky, a student at Princeton University. In collaboration with Alex Gerber (AT&T Research), Dan Pei (AT&T Research), Jennifer Rexford (Princeton University), and Aman Shaikh (AT&T Research), we studied the extent of IPv6 deployment at both global and local levels. Our conclusions can be summarized by the following three points:
> 1.) IPv6 deployment is not seen as a pressing issue.
> 2.) We saw a lack of meaningful IPv6 traffic (mostly DNS/Domain and ICMP messages), possibly indicating that IPv6 networks are still experimental.
> 3.) Studying Teredo traffic suggested that it may be used for NAT busting by P2P networks.
> Our paper (submitted and presented at PAM 2009) can be found at . If you have comments or feedback with respect to these results, please feel free to express them.

Nasty comment time...

"To analyze native IPv6 traffic, we use Netflow records collected from an
IPv6 Internet gateway router in a US tier-1 ISP with 11 IPv6 BGP
neighbors. These records were collected from 2008-4-1 to 2008-9-26, and
are taken from the business customers. "

Sorry to have to make this comment, but the IPv6 side of the Internet is
quite a bit larger than "11 peers". I don't really think that AT&T can
call themselves a "tier-1 ISP" on the IPv6 field (they can on IPv4),
especially as there are these wonderful give-aways as using OCCAID as a

 7 (2001:730::1:2d)  51.944 ms  51.596
ms  51.915 ms
 8 (2001:730::1:2a)  60.802 ms  61.405
ms  61.498 ms
 9 (2001:7f8:4::7577:1)  37.941 ms  37.797
ms  37.88 ms
10 (2001:4830:fe:1010::2)  106.622 ms
106.538 ms  106.701 ms
11 (2001:4830:e2:2a::2)  145.847 ms  145.762 ms
146.049 ms
12  2001:1890:61:9017::2 (2001:1890:61:9017::2)  222.045 ms  222.694 ms
 223.185 ms
13 (2001:1890:1112:1::20)  221.683 ms  221.66 ms  222.839 ms

Heck, I can't find a single ISP in GRH with which I can reach AT&T
(where eg is currently in) from Europe directly.

Unfortunately, I will have to state that that thus completely makes that
 whole paper useless as the data is used is just that: useless.

I really really really hope that AT&T finally realizes that they have to
start deploying IPv6.

When they have done that, re-run your "study" and then release those
numbers as then they will maybe be interesting when there are actual
customers on the links.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list