IPv6 at 50% for VZW (Re: NAT IP and Google)
jared at puck.nether.net
Fri May 23 01:21:03 UTC 2014
On May 22, 2014, at 9:14 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 22, 2014, Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:
> On May 22, 2014, at 8:04 AM, Livingood, Jason <Jason_Livingood at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> > On 5/21/14, 9:38 PM, "Jared Mauch" <jared at puck.nether.net> wrote:
> >> On May 21, 2014, at 7:17 PM, Ca By <cb.list6 at 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. :-)
> I'm waiting to see Akamai and Cachefly follow the lead of Cloudflare and make everything IPv6 by default. I remind vendors when I talk to them, "IPv6 first, then IP classic(tm)".
> Akamai has been v6 enabled for years. Customers have choices and know best.
I respectfully disagree with the 'know best', I've seen many customers who don't know the right choice and it takes a bit of time to learn the right way.
> Isn't your network still offering both as customer choices? :-)
We still are, and I posted recently on ratio that we see, which is 286:1
With so many people already doing IPv6 on their main sites, I'm hard pressed to believe this won't break people who aren't already broken.
You can't cater to everyones broken network. I can't reach 184.108.40.206 from here either, but sometimes when I travel I can, even with TTL=1. At some point folks have to fix what's broken.
More information about the NANOG