Study of IPv6 Deployment

Tue Apr 28 17:21:17 UTC 2009

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 4:06 AM, Jeroen Massar <jeroen at unfix.org> wrote:

> 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
> http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~elliottk/ipv6study.html<http://www.cs.princeton.edu/%7Eelliottk/ipv6study.html>. 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
> transit:
>
> [..]
>  7  fr-par02a-re1-t-2.ipv6.aorta.net (2001:730::1:2d)  51.944 ms  51.596
> ms  51.915 ms
>  8  uk-lon01a-re1-t-1.ipv6.aorta.net (2001:730::1:2a)  60.802 ms  61.405
> ms  61.498 ms
>  9  ibr01-ve26.lndn01.occaid.net (2001:7f8:4::7577:1)  37.941 ms  37.797
> ms  37.88 ms
> 10  bbr01-p1-0.nwrk01.occaid.net (2001:4830:fe:1010::2)  106.622 ms
> 106.538 ms  106.701 ms
> 11  r1.mdtnj.ipv6.att.net (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  mail.ietf.org (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 www.ietf.org 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.
>
> Greets,
>  Jeroen
>
>