On 6/17/14 6:12 PM, "Andrew Fried" <andrew.fried@gmail.com> wrote:
IPv6 will never become the defacto standard until the vast majority of users have access to IPv6 connectivity.
How many users have access to IPv6 connectivity? Since this is NANOG, let's talk about North America. Canada is way behind, just 0.4% deployment. The U.S. is one of the top countries, in both number of users and number of top web sites. Three of the big four U.S. ISPs have double-digit deployment. It's not the "vast majority" yet, because: 1. Older modems don't support IPv6 (older than, what, 2008?). As those churn, counts will rise. 2. Older gateways, especially consumer-owned retail devices, don't support IPv6. Churn would help, if new retail gateways supported IPv6. 3. The <10% of people with MacOS use IPv6 half the time (more or less) that it's available. I can't find statements right now, but I think those big three are all
90% deployed, if you don't count rolling trucks to replace modems. The number of IPv6-capable users is several times higher than the number of people actually using IPv6, and I don't know why.
Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile have great IPv6 deployments, too, maybe a couple more years for older handsets to age out. Still, >50% of VzW LTE devices use IPv6 now.
Everything I have at the colo is dual stacked, but I can't reach my own systems via IPv6 because my business class Verizon Fios connection is IPv4 *only*.
Well there's your problem.
Yes, Comcast is in the process of rolling out IPv6, but my Comcast circuit in Washington DC is IPv4 only. And I'd suspect that everyone with Time Warner, AT&T, Cox, etc are all in the same boat.
I think all of those companies offer IPv6 on their business-only services (e.g., fiber, ethernet, etc.). For access methods shared with residential users (i.e., DOCSIS, DSL), it's not rolled out yet. . . RSN.
Whether the reason for the lack of IPv6 deployment is laziness or an intentional omission on the part of large ISPs to protect their income from leasing IPv4 addresses
ISPs want to protect their income by continuing to turn up services. Lee
Andrew Fried andrew.fried@gmail.com
On 6/17/14, 5:48 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Jun 17, 2014, at 5:41 PM, Lee Howard <Lee@asgard.org> wrote:
On 6/17/14 4:20 PM, "Jay Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
Here's what the general public is hearing:
But only while they still have IPv4 addresses: ~$ dig AAAA arstechnica.com +short ~$
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/06/with-the-americas -ru nning-out-of-ipv4-its-official-the-internet-is-full/
Can't tech news sites *please* run dual stack while they're spouting end-of-IPv4 stories?
<wishful thinking=on>
I would love to see a few more properties do IPv6 by default, such as ARS, Twitter and a few others. After posting some links and being a log stalker last night the first 3 hits from non-bots were from users on IPv6 enabled networks.
It does ring a bit hollow that these sites haven't gotten there when others (Google, Facebook) have already shown you can publish AAAA records with no adverse public impact. Making IPv6 available by default for users would be an excellent step. People like AT&T who control the 'attwifi' ssid could do NAT66 at their sites and provide similar service to the masses. With chains like Hilton, McDonalds, etc.. all having this available, it would push IPv6 very far almost immediately with no adverse impact compared to users IPv4 experience.
- Jared