V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members, (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4, NetBlock))
Abraham Y. Chen
aychen at avinta.com
Fri Mar 11 20:06:42 UTC 2022
Hi, Ca By:
1) Re: Ur. Pt. 1) " ... the number is 46% in the USA. ": Whoa!
Your revised number is even higher. And, I could round it up to 50%!
Seriously, please be specific about where are you reading the number
that you are reporting? I commented after reading your second reference,
because I could not find relevant data from the first one. Is there
something hidden there? Please identify.
2) Re: Ur. Pt. 2): I have to wait for your clarification for Pt. 1)
above to proceed with these additional statements.
Abe (2022-03-11 15:06)
On 2022-03-11 11:19, Ca By wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 7:15 AM Abraham Y. Chen <aychen at avinta.com> wrote:
> Dear Ca By:
> 1) It appears that you are reading the Google graph too
> optimistically, or incorrectly. That is, the highest peaks of the
> graph are about 38%. The average of the graph is about 36%. Citing
> "over 40%" from these is a gross exaggeration. In fact, the peaks
> were reached on weekends and holidays due to more residential
> usage, you can clearly see such by zooming into the graph. In
> addition, the graph has been exhibiting an asymptomatic trend ever
> since a few years back. The COVID-19 pushed this graph up a bit
> due to the lock-down and work-from-home factors. Below was an
> analysis pre-pandemic:
> Sorry for being imprecise in my communication, the number is 46% in
> the USA.
> 2) Since Google is one of the stronger IPv6 promoters, usage of
> IPv6 outside of the Google domain can only be lower, by simple
> logic deduction.
> Google’s number represents how many users reach it over ipv6. Given
> Google’s ubiquity in the usa, it is a fair barometer for the usa at
> large. This data is helpful for content providers estimating demand
> for ipv6 (46% of users will use ipv6 if it is available) and for the
> network operator community to understand where their peers sit.
> In summary, there is a lot of ipv6 on the usa internet today. Almost
> half for Google, per their published numbers. Over 75% end to end ipv6
> on some large mobile networks. Hence my appeal to view published data.
> Reading anecdotal Nanog mails from a handful of folks concluding ipv6
> has failed will not leave the passive impartial observer with an
> accurate view.
> Abe (2022-03-11 10:11)
> NANOG Digest, Vol 170, Issue 12
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 08:00:17 -0800
> From: Ca By<cb.list6 at gmail.com> <mailto:cb.list6 at gmail.com>
> To: Saku Ytti<saku at ytti.fi> <mailto:saku at ytti.fi>
> Cc: Joe Greco<jgreco at ns.sol.net> <mailto:jgreco at ns.sol.net>,nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: V6 still not supported (was Re: CC: s to Non List Members
> (was Re: 202203080924.AYC Re: 202203071610.AYC Re: Making Use of 240/4
> <CAD6AjGTyQT-OMq_KXxFe-sozWq3mSJ5gC_tKswdpJpi7mMEwFQ at mail.gmail.com> <mailto:CAD6AjGTyQT-OMq_KXxFe-sozWq3mSJ5gC_tKswdpJpi7mMEwFQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 11:56 PM Saku Ytti<saku at ytti.fi> <mailto:saku at ytti.fi> wrote:
>> On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 at 21:00, Joe Greco<jgreco at ns.sol.net> <mailto:jgreco at ns.sol.net> wrote:
>>> I really never thought it'd be 2022 and my networks would be still
>>> heavily v4. Mind boggling.
>> Same. And if we don't voluntarily agree to do something to it, it'll
>> be the same in 2042, we fucked up and those who come after us pay the
>> price of the insane amount of work and cost dual stack causes.
>> It is solvable, easily and cheaply, like most problems (energy,
>> climate), but not when so many poor leaders participate in decision
> Ah, the quarterly ipv6 thread? where i remind you all? most of the USA is
> on ipv6 (all your smartphone, many of your home router, a growing amount of
> your clouds [i see you aws])
> Google sees over 40% of their users on ipv6, with superior latency
> -------------- next part --------------
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the NANOG